News
Health Care
[03/18]
In the Battle of the Sexes - Who Will Go the Longest?
[03/18]
Christiana Care Health System's Kidney Transplant Program Wins National Kidney Foundation Award
[03/18]
Midroog Ltd., an Affiliate of Moody's Investors Services, Rates Potential new Debt of Elbit Imaging
[03/18]
Continued Demand Makes Monsanto and Agriculture Unique Investment Opportunities, Global Seeds and Traits Lead to Tell Investors
[03/18]
New iVillage Study Reveals That Majority of Women 18-34 Go Online First With Health Questions - Before Turning to Their Doctor or Other Family Members
More...
Tort
[03/18]
Gov't orders recall of 1.2 million high chairs
[03/18]
1 killed, 2 injured in fire at small Detroit hotel
[03/17]
Beach jogger killed by plane likely never heard it
[03/17]
Friends to search Utah campsite for missing mom
[03/17]
Toyota, US inspectors examine wrecked NY Prius
More...
Case Summaries
Health Law
[03/18]
Payne v. Peninsula Sch. Dist.
In an action under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) by the mother of an autistic student, dismissal of the action is affirmed where the district court correctly found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the federal claims because plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies before coming into federal court.
[03/18]
Bath Iron Works Corp. v. Fields
In plaintiff-employee's claim for disability benefits under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA), petition for review of the Benefits Review Board's decision affirming an award of the plaintiff's disability benefits based on section 20(a) of the LHWCA, which provides that certain disabilities are presumed to be work-related in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, is denied as the Board correctly concluded that defendant had not produced "substantial evidence" to rebut the presumption of causation between plaintiff's working conditions and his pain.
[03/17]
Buck v. Thomas M. Cooley Law Sch.
In plaintiff's lawsuit against her former law school claiming violation of the ADA and breach of various implied contracts, arising from her dismissal from the law school for falling below the required minimum G.P.A. of 2.0, dismissal of the lawsuit is affirmed where plaintiff is precluded by res judicata from raising the claims at issue as she should have supplemented her complaint in state court with claims that arose during the pendency of that suit.
[03/16]
Schexnayder v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co.
In an ERISA action claiming that defendant-insurer wrongly denied plaintiff disability benefits, summary judgment on the merits for plaintiff is affirmed where defendant's decision was procedurally unreasonable because the Social Security Administration (SSA) determined that plaintiff was fully disabled and unable to perform any work, but defendant did not address the SSA award in any of its denial letters. However, the district court's order granting plaintiff attorney's fees is reversed where the legal questions in this case were much closer than the district court credited, and the district court therefore abused its discretion in assessing attorneys' fees against defendant.
[03/16]
US v. Livesay
In defendant's appeal from the district court's order committing him to the custody of the Attorney General while expressly leaving open the possibility of his release, either conditionally or unconditionally, at a later date, the order is affirmed where the district court was correct when it concluded that it was not statutorily authorized to afford defendant a conditional release, even if it wished to do so.
More...
Injury & Tort Law
[03/17]
Willbros RPI, Inc. v. Continental Cas. Co.
In an action against an insurer seeking a declaratory judgment that defendant was required to provide defense and indemnity, partial summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) conduct that clearly fell outside of the professional services exclusion provides an independent "but for" cause of the injury; and 2) indemnity issues must await resolution of the underlying suit. However, the order is reversed in part where defendant-insurers' "Other Insurance" provisions conflicted and liability for defense of the underlying suit should thus be apportioned on a pro rata basis.
[03/17]
Holmes v. Kimco Realty Corp.
In plaintiff's negligence suit against a retailer for injuries he sustained when he fell on ice/snow in the parking lot, summary judgment in favor of the defendant is affirmed as the state of New Jersey would not impose a duty on an individual tenant for snow removal from the common areas of a multi-tenant parking lot when the landlord has retained and exercised that responsibility.
[03/17]
T.E. v. Grindle
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against an elementary principal and the school district's band teacher arising from molestation of several young girls by the band teacher, district court's denial of the principal's motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds is affirmed as the plaintiffs have put forth evidence which, if credited by the jury, is sufficient to create liability under the clearly established law.
[03/17]
In re Ephedra Prods. Litig.
In a personal injury action alleging injuries resulting from the ingestion of the drug ephedra, the Second Circuit certified the following questions to the New York Court of Appeals: 1) Are the provisions of N.Y. C.P.L.R. section 214-c(4) providing for an extension of the statute of limitations in certain circumstances limited to actions for injuries caused by the latent effects of exposure to a substance? 2) Can an injury that occurs within 24 to 48 hours of exposure to a substance be considered "latent" for these purposes? 3) What standards should be applied to determine whether a genuine issue of material fact exists for resolution by a trier of fact as to whether "technical, scientific or medical knowledge and information sufficient to ascertain the cause of [the plaintiff's] injury" was "discovered, identified or determined" for N.Y. C.P.L.R. section 214-c(4) purposes?
[03/16]
McBride v. CSX Transp. Inc.
In plaintiff's action under the Federal Employer's Liability Act (FELA) seeking compensation for injuries he sustained while performing switching operations for his employer, district court's judgment in favor of the plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) common law proximate causation is not required to establish liability under the FELA; and 2) district court did not commit instructional error refusing defendant's proffered instruction and giving the causation instruction to the jury instead as it correctly and completely informed the jury of the applicable law.
More...
Professional Malpractice
[03/11]
Freedman v. Brutzkus
In plaintiff's action for fraud against defendants, trial court's dismissal of the action following the sustaining of defendants' demurrer is affirmed as a signature of an attorney under the legend "approved as to form and content" on a contract does not amount to an actionable representation to an opposing party's attorney that can provide a basis for tort liability.
[03/04]
Aills v. Boemi
In plaintiff's medical malpractice suit against defendant plastic surgeon arising out of negligence in connection with an elective surgical procedure for breast reconstruction, the judgment of the Second District Court of Appeal is quashed and remanded as the district court erred in reversing for a new trial on the basis of an improper argument by plaintiff's counsel during closing argument.
[03/03]
Willis v. Bender
In an action for lack of informed consent and medical malpractice, judgment for defendant is affirmed in part where there was no evidence, specifically expert testimony, that another physician was negligent and therefore no basis to hold defendant liable for his negligence. However, the judgment is reversed in part where defendant's alleged misrepresentations to plaintiff in response to her direct questions allegedly induced her to consent to the surgery and its risks, and under those circumstances, if proved, her consent could hardly be considered "informed".
[03/03]
Oasis W. Realty, LLC v. Goldman
In an appeal involving defendants' anti-SLAPP special motion to strike (Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16) plaintiff-former client's suit for various causes of action including breach of fiduciary duty, arising from defendants' prior representation in connection with plaintiff's efforts to redevelop real estate it owned in Beverly Hills, trial court's conclusion that section 425.16 did not apply because the gravamen of the action was breach of an attorney's duties of loyalty and confidentiality is reversed as all causes of action in the complaint arose from acts in furtherance of protected activity, and plaintiff could not show a probability of prevailing at trial.
[03/02]
Davis v. Brouse McDowell, LPA
In plaintiff's legal malpractice suit claiming that defendants failed to timely file three patent applications related to a website-search engine, summary judgment in favor of the defendants is affirmed where: 1) the district court exercised proper jurisdiction over plaintiff's malpractice cause of action; 2) the court did not abuse its discretion in striking portions of the supplemental affidavit of plaintiff's patent law expert; and 3) plaintiff failed to introduce evidence sufficient to establish a genuine issue of material fact as to the patentability of her inventions.
More...
