News
Health Care
[11/20]
IVF Florida Announces New Patient Finance Solution for Fertility Treatments
[11/20]
St. Jude Patients and Expert Chefs Join Forces To Create Gingerbread House
[11/20]
Survive and Thrive This Holiday Season with Rescue Remedy and Advice from Mallika Chopra
[11/20]
In Memory of Patrick Swayze, Songwriter Encourages People to Throw Away Cigarettes - and She'll Give You Her New CD - Free!
[11/20]
Karolinska Development and EIF Start Landmark Co-Investment Fund for Life Science Innovation
More...
Tort
[11/20]
AP IMPACT: Gripes about swine flu vaccine abound
[11/20]
Ala. court says woman can't claim $41.8M jackpot
[11/20]
NYC model who married doorman sues upscale co-op
[11/20]
$6M verdict upheld in McDonald's strip search case
[11/20]
Dendreon's Provenge gets FDA review date
More...
Case Summaries
Health Law
[11/20]
Chambers v. Sch. Dist. of Phiadelphia Bd. of Educ.
In plaintiffs' suit against a school district on behalf of their daughter who suffers from cognitive and developmental disorders alleging that the district's failure to provide their daughter with appropriate eduction obstructed her intellectual growth, summary judgment for defendant favor is affirmed for the most part but a portion of its ruling is vacated and remanded where: 1) district court erred in determining that the plaintiffs do not have standing to pursue their Individuals with Disabilities Education Act claim; and 2) plaintiffs did not waive their right to proceed directly under the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA.
[11/19]
Fleming v. Yuma Reg. Med. Ctr.
In an action for employment discrimination based on plaintiff's disability, summary judgment for defendant is reversed where Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. section 794, extends to a claim of discrimination brought by an independent contractor because the Rehabilitation Act covers all individuals "subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."
[11/19]
Kelly v. CB&I Constructors, Inc.
In plaintiff's suit against the defendant for sparking a brush fire that caused a significant damage to his ranch, judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) defendant forfeited any error in the jury's verdict form; 2) jury's award of restoration damages in excess of the property's value was supported by substantial evidence and was not excessive as a matter of law; 3) the undisputed evidence established that plaintiff did not reside on the property at the time of the trespass, and his storage of personal property there was not the type of "occupancy" that would justify his recovery of annoyance and discomfort damages; 4) tree damage caused by a negligently spread fire is wrongful injury to trees caused by a trespass subject to mandatory doubling pursuant to Civil Code section 3346, notwithstanding the general provision governing fire damage in Health and Safety Code section 13007; and 5) substantial evidence supported trial court's finding that plaintiff intended to use the property for raising livestock, entitling him to an award of attorney's fees under Code of Civ. Proc. section 1021.9.
[11/17]
Couch v. Bd. of Trustees of Mem. Hosp. of Carbon County
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging that defendant-hospital board deprived plaintiff-physician of his First Amendment right of free speech through a campaign of retaliation against him for speaking out about substance abuse at the hospital, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where neither the hospital's investigation of plaintiff nor its warning letter to him constituted an adverse employment action for First Amendment purposes.
[11/17]
Brown v. J.B. Hunt Transp. Servs., Inc.
In an ERISA action based on the discontinuation of plaintiff's long-term disability (LTD) benefits, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed in part where defendant-insurer could not be held liable for statutory penalties because 29 U.S.C. section 1132(c) only provided a cause of action against plan administrators. However, the order is reversed in part where defendant's failure to comply with its duty under section 1133(2) to provide plaintiff with "a reasonable opportunity for a full and fair review" of defendant's decision to discontinue plaintiff's LTD benefits excused plaintiff's failure to exhaust before bringing suit under section 1132(a).
More...
Injury & Tort Law
[11/20]
Hukic v. Aurora Loan Serv.
In plaintiff's suit against defendants claiming breach of contract, tortious interference, and violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, arising from a six-figure mortgage he obtained at an interest rate of 10.65% where he was to make monthly payments as well as taxes, insurance premiums and other charges and fees, summary judgment in defendants' favor and dismissal of plaintiff's claims for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress is affirmed because plaintiff did not comply with the terms of his agreement that required him to submit proof of payment.
[11/19]
Hoffman v. Smithwoods RV Park, LLC
In plaintiff's suit against the defendant-Mobile Park for refusing to permit the installation of a new mobile home in its mobile home park to replace an older one that plaintiff had inherited, trial court's dismissal of plaintiff's suit is affirmed where: 1) the complaint fails to state a cause of action for statutory violation; 2) the complaint fails to state a tort cause of action for interference with contract; 3) the complaint fails to state a contract cause of action; and 4) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend.
[11/19]
Johnson v. Honeywell Int'l Inc.
In plaintiff's suit against the defendants arising from injuries he sustained as an HVAC technician while working on defendants' air conditioning equipment, trial court's judgment in favor of defendants is reversed as the sophisticated user defense applies to the negligence cause of action, but not to the strict liability cause of action.
[11/19]
Kelly v. CB&I Constructors, Inc.
In plaintiff's suit against the defendant for sparking a brush fire that caused a significant damage to his ranch, judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) defendant forfeited any error in the jury's verdict form; 2) jury's award of restoration damages in excess of the property's value was supported by substantial evidence and was not excessive as a matter of law; 3) the undisputed evidence established that plaintiff did not reside on the property at the time of the trespass, and his storage of personal property there was not the type of "occupancy" that would justify his recovery of annoyance and discomfort damages; 4) tree damage caused by a negligently spread fire is wrongful injury to trees caused by a trespass subject to mandatory doubling pursuant to Civil Code section 3346, notwithstanding the general provision governing fire damage in Health and Safety Code section 13007; and 5) substantial evidence supported trial court's finding that plaintiff intended to use the property for raising livestock, entitling him to an award of attorney's fees under Code of Civ. Proc. section 1021.9.
[11/19]
Jennings v. Jones
In plaintiff's civil rights case against the state of Rhode Island and a State Police representative and other police officers who had executed a search warrant of his workplace at the Narrangansett Indian Tribe "smoke shop", jury's verdict in favor of defendant in the second trial is affirmed as: 1) there was no abuse of discretion in granting a new trial based on the ground that, even if the jury verdict had unambiguously rested on the increased force theory, that theory would have been contrary to the weight of the evidence; and 2) there was no waiver of the new trial motion by defendant.
More...
Professional Malpractice
[11/16]
Montalvo v. Gonzalez-Amparo
In an action alleging malpractice by plaintiff's deceased mother's medical care providers, dismissal of the suit as time-barred is vacated and remanded where: 1) the date of accrual for plaintiff's personal claim was within the one-year statute of limitations; and 2) under 32 L.P.R.A. section 255, plaintiff is entitled to bring her mother's medical malpractice claim because it was brought within one year of her mother's death.
[11/12]
Berry & Murphy, P.C. v. Carolina Cas. Ins. Co.
In an action for insurance coverage for a malpractice lawsuit, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the alleged acts of malpractice in a letter sent to the malpractice defendant and the lawsuit were "connected by an inevitable or predictable interrelation or sequence of events" for purposes of the policy; 2) the insurance policy treated as one claim all "related wrongful acts"; and 3) because defendant had no legally cognizable duty to defend or indemnify a claim, plaintiffs' bad faith claim could not survive.
[11/12]
Cassel v. Sup. Ct.
In plaintiff's legal malpractice suit, his request for writ of relief from two orders excluding evidence in favor of his former attorneys is granted and the orders vacated as the communications are a client and his attorney, outside the presence of, and not otherwise communicated to, any opposing party or the mediator, and reveal nothing said or done in the mediation discussion.
[10/28]
James River Ins. Co. v. Kemper Cas. Ins. Co.
In plaintiff-insurer's case seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify two lawyers who were sued for malpractice, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant-insurer is reversed with instructions to enter the declaratory judgment requested by plaintiff as its policy does not apply since it excludes coverage of conduct covered by a prior insurer, and all the wrongful acts alleged in the malpractice suit arose from events that took place in defendant's policy period.
[10/23]
Kamelgard v. Macura
In plaintiff-surgeon's case against defendant, another surgeon, for defamation, district court's dismissal of the case without prejudice is affirmed, but the judgment is modified to make the dismissal with prejudice, as the suit was time-barred.
More...
