News

[07/22] Woman runs sword into foot during Wiccan ceremony
[07/18] NY man loses prosthetic leg while skydiving
[07/18] Fisherman hooks drowning man and reels him in
[07/18] 5,000 gallons of molasses spill on Texas highway
[07/10] Man sues Tenn. church over spiritual fall
[07/08] Truck rams Concorde, knocks off its nose in NYC
[07/11] Lightning claims 5 young lives in a week
[07/22] Women on antidepressants may benefit from Viagra
[07/21] Mass. patient tested for brain disorder
[07/17] Cleveland Clinic taking kidneys through navel

More...

Articles

Motor Vehicle Accidents

Motor Vehicle Accidents that result in bodily injury are a very common occurrence. Before the advent and increase of automobile insurance laws, which often contain a provision that makes anyone operating a motor vehicle with the owner's permission an additional insured, special tort laws were developed to deal with liability for automobile accidents. These laws are, for the most part, rarely used in present disputes or litigation due to the pervasive nature of modern automobile liability insurance. However, the special laws do still arise on occasion in motor vehicle accident cases.

More...

What to do if You are in an Automobile Accident

Would you know what to do if you drove your car into another car? A pedestrian? When a car accident happens, injuries may be severe and emotions may be high. However, there are important things that must be taken care of both at the scene of any accident and following an accident. The following is a list of things that should be done, if at all possible, when any accident occurs.

More...

Case Summaries

[07/23] Montano v. Chicago
In a suit seeking recovery for injuries suffered by plaintiffs in confrontations with police, dismissals of plaintiffs' claims are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the district court clearly erred in dismissing plaintiffs' claims with prejudice as a sanction for abuse of the judicial process; 2) judgments as a matter of law for police officers on certain claims was error as there was an evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for plaintiffs; 3) summary judgment for defendants on claims that they lacked probable cause to arrest plaintiffs for public drinking and disorderly conduct, and that they failed to intervene to prevent the use of excessive force by other officers, was proper; and 4) summary judgment for city on a liability claim under Monell was proper where plaintiffs failed to produce evidence to show deliberate indifference by the police board to constitutional violations by its officers.

[07/23] Gil v. Reed
In an inmate's negligence, malpractice, and civil rights suit against prison medical staff, summary judgment for defendants is reversed where the record contained sufficient evidence to show genuine issues of material fact on: 1) inmate's Eighth Amendment claim that prison staff were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs; and 2) whether defendants had met the standard of care, using the state-law standard as required by the Federal Tort Claims Act.

[07/22] Ryan v. US
In a suit against the government under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) claiming that two plaintiffs were switched at birth in 1946 and sent home with the wrong mothers due to the government's negligence, dismissal of the suit is affirmed where, upon consideration of the record and equitable arguments, the statute of limitations was properly found to bar the action.

[07/22] CNA v. US
In a negligence suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) stemming from a robbery and shooting by an Army recruit, dismissal of plaintiffs'-insurers' claims is affirmed where: 1) under the FTCA's requirements for waiving sovereign immunity, the question of whether an agent of the government was acting within the scope of his employment is a subject-matter jurisdiction issue properly analyzed under Fed. R. Civ. P 12(b)(1) for purposes of considering a motion to dismiss; 2) the Army recruiter against whom negligence was alleged was not acting within the scope of his employment; and 3) no evidence supported a negligent-supervision claim against either the recruiter's supervisor or the Army as a whole.

[07/22] Williams v. Town of Greenburgh
In an action under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, judgment dismissing plaintiff's claims against defendant-town and two municipal officers is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's desire to use town's community center was not protected by his right to freedom of movement; 2) plaintiff's speech was not silenced or chilled by defendant's allegedly punitive conduct; and 3) probable cause supported the arrest and prosecution of plaintiff's criminal trespass.

[07/21] Simmons v. Ghaderi
In a breach of contract action arising from a medical malpractice suit, wherein plaintiffs sought to enforce an oral settlement agreement allegedly formed during mediation, a ruling upholding a decision to admit evidence relating to the mediation proceedings is reversed where: 1) the court of appeal improperly relied on the doctrine of estoppel to create a judicial exception to the comprehensive statutory scheme of mediation confidentiality; and 2) the evidence relating to the mediation proceedings should not have been admitted at trial.

[07/21] Crawford v. Weather Shield Mfg. Inc.
In a case involving the contractual duty to defend in a noninsurance context, judgment and rulings against defendant-subcontractor is affirmed where, by their particular terms, the provisions of a pre-2006 residential construction subcontract obliged subcontractor to defend its indemnitee-developer/builder in lawsuits brought against both parties, insofar as the plaintiffs' complaints alleged construction defects arising from the subcontractor's negligence, even though: 1) a jury ultimately found that the subcontractor was not negligent; and 2) the parties accepted an interpretation of the subcontract that gave the builder no right of indemnity unless the subcontractor was negligent.

[07/21] Garcia v. Paramount Citrus
Judgment pursuant to a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff who was severely injured in an auto accident on a private road owned by defendant is reversed where defendant had no duty to plaintiff arising from the nonpermissive, negligent use of its property by a third party. (Opinion after rehearing)

[07/21] Hoag v. Amex Ins. Co.
Dismissal of plaintiff's uninsured-motorist claim as a sanction for his failure to provide discovery as ordered by the trial court was neither too extreme nor an abuse of discretion where the failures were willful and repeated.

[07/18] Ginter v. Belcher, Prendergast & Laporte
In an interlocutory appeal arising from a dispute between a married couple and their attorney, a district court's ruling finding that a forum-selection clause in the parties' attorney-client agreement was unenforceable is reversed where: 1) the forum-selection clause in the agreement was enforceable as it was not the product of overreaching nor was it against public policy; and 2) the clause governed the tort claims at issue.

More...