Top Legal News » Tort Law

Lal v. State of Cal.

admin — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:08:48 +0000

(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Criminal Law & Procedure, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Injury And Tort Law) In an action against the California Highway Patrol and certain officers for the shooting death of plaintiff’s husband, dismissal of the action with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute when her attorney failed to meet deadlines and attend hearings is reversed where an attorney’s gross negligence constituted an extraordinary circumstance warranting relief from a judgment dismissing the case for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b).

Crescent Towing & Salvage Co. v. Chios Beauty MV

admin — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:08:41 +0000

(U.S. 5th Cir., Admiralty, Injury And Tort Law, Remedies, Transportation) In an action for damages sustained when defendant’s ship collided with plaintiffs’ barges and tugboats during Hurricane Katrina, partial judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where the district court did not clearly err in its finding of a predicted “direct hit” on New Orleans by the hurricane, its factual findings based on this finding, and the ultimate finding of negligence to the extent that it relied upon this finding. However, the matter is remanded where the district court needed to enter an order setting the total amount of recovery plaintiffs could recover in rem.

Bagby Elevator Co. v. Schindler Elevator Corp.

admin — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:08:38 +0000

(U.S. 5th Cir., Commercial Law, Contracts, Evidence, Injury And Tort Law) In an action for tortious interference with contract, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) under the court’s highly deferential standard of review, there was no reversible error in the district court’s decision to use the pattern jury instruction; 2) there was sufficient evidence of both malice and gross negligence to support an award of exemplary damages; and 3) there was ample evidence of causation to support the verdict.

Yanez v. SOMA Envtl. Eng’g, Inc.

admin — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:06:15 +0000

(Cal. App., Injury And Tort Law, Remedies) In plaintiff’s suit for injuries she suffered in an automobile accident, trial court’s grant of defendants’ motion to reduce the award for medical expenses from $44,519.01 to $18,368.24 is reversed and remanded where: 1) trial court erred in reducing plaintiff’s damages to the amount actually paid by her insurers as the amounts written off by plaintiff’s health care providers constitute collateral benefits of her insurance; and 2) on remand, the trial court is to award plaintiff prejudgment interest under Civ. Code section 3291.

Simmons v. Navajo County

admin — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:05:16 +0000

(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law) In a civil rights action against county jail personnel claiming that they negligently permitted the suicide of an inmate, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed in part where: 1) no reasonable jury could conclude that a nurse consciously disregarded an excessive risk to plaintiffs’ decedent’s safety; 2) plaintiffs adduced no evidence that a corrections officer knew that the decedent was suicidal; and 3) because there was no underlying constitutional violation, plaintiffs could not maintain a claim for municipal liability. However, the judgment is vacated in part where, should the district court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ state law claims, it may remand those claims to state court for further proceedings.

Thach v. Tiger Corp.

admin — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:05:11 +0000

(U.S. 8th Cir., Civil Procedure, Injury And Tort Law, International Law, Manufacturing, Product Liability) In a negligence, products liability, and breach of warranty action against the Japanese manufacturer of a rice cooker which allegedly caused a fire at plaintiffs’ home, judgment on the pleadings for defendant is affirmed where plaintiffs had failed to serve defendant within South Dakota’s three-year statute of limitations, because delivery of plaintiffs’ request for service to the Japanese Foreign Affairs Ministry on either December 7 or 19 did not toll the limitations period under S.D. Stat. 15-2-31 before its expiration on December 11, 2007.

Hendrix v. Evenflo Co.

admin — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:05:08 +0000

(U.S. 11th Cir., Evidence, Injury And Tort Law, Manufacturing, Product Liability) In an action alleging that plaintiff’s son sustained traumatic brain injuries when a child restraint system manufactured by defendant malfunctioned during a minor traffic accident, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding plaintiff’s expert testimony based on the insufficient reliability of that testimony under Daubert.

Gonzalez v. Dept. of Labor

admin — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:02:07 +0000

(U.S. D.C. Cir., Administrative Law, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law) In an action challenging the Department of Labor’s decision that plaintiff was required to pay the Department a share of the proceeds from a personal injury action, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the settlement agreement clearly showed that the parties’ mutual intent was to have both spouses release their respective claims against defendants; 2) it was for Labor to determine how much of plaintiffs’ settlement proceeds should be allocated to plaintiff’s loss of consortium claim; and 3) plaintiffs offered insufficient evidence to substantiate their claim for costs.

Armstrong v. Geithner

admin — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:02:00 +0000

(U.S. D.C. Cir., Communications Law, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law) In an action alleging that Department of the Treasury employees violated the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. section 552a, by disclosing the details of an investigation into plaintiff’s conduct, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where plaintiff failed to establish that the information disclosed had been retrieved from a record held in a system of records, as required in an action for damages under the Privacy Act.

Anderson v. Bayer Corp.

admin — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:01:58 +0000

(U.S. 7th Cir., Class Actions, Drugs & Biotech, Injury And Tort Law, Product Liability) In a suit for personal injuries caused by Trasylol, a prescription medication manufactured by Bayer, defendants’ petition for leave to appeal under 28 U.S.C. section 1453(c) of a district court’s order remanding four of the five cases is denied for lack of jurisdiction as the district court properly concluded that the four cases were not “mass” actions under CAFA.