Legal News

Case Summaries

Injury & Tort Law

[10/14] Koch v. Southwestern Elec. Power Co.
In a tort action alleging negligence in maintaining power lines causing the electrocution deaths of decedents, grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant-power company is affirmed where: 1) decedents' accident occurred under unusual circumstances about which defendant had no notice; 2) that it was not foreseeable; and 3) that defendant therefore had no legal duty to the decedents.

[10/14] M.Y. v. Special Sch. Dist. No. 1
In a claim brought by parents of a 15-year-old disabled girl for damages arising from a sexual assault allegedly perpetrated against their daughter by her bus driver, grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant school district is affirmed where: 1) defendant-district's decision not to provide M.Y. special education transportation to and from summer school did not have the effect of denying her a free and appropriate public education because this action was in accordance with the terms of M.Y.'s Implementation of an Individualized Education Program (IEP); 2) defendant lacked the requisite intent to be liable under section 504; and 3) the district court was correct in granting summary judgment against plaintiff-parents as to their section 1983 claims.

[10/14] Arreola v. Godinez
In a putative class-action suit by an inmate challenging a jail's policy of denying crutches to injured inmates in certain areas of the jail, denial of certification of a class for injunctive relief is affirmed, and denial of certification of a class for damages is remanded where: 1) plaintiff had standing to sue; 2) plaintiff's second amended complaint was not time-barred; 3) the proposed class for injunctive relief did not meet the Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) requirements for certification; and 4) remand was necessary for consideration of whether the proposed damages class met the Rule 23(b)(3) requirements.

[10/10] In Re: Volkswagen of Am. Inc.
In a products-liability suit alleging that design defects in defendant's automobile caused plaintiffs' injuries in a freeway accident, defendant's petition for a writ of mandamus to transfer venue is granted by the court sitting en banc where: 1) mandamus is an appropriate means to review a district court's ruling on a venue transfer motion when there is a clear abuse of discretion; 2) the district court's analysis of the venue-transfer factors was erroneous, and as a result defendant had a clear and indisputable right to issuance of the writ; and 3) defendant showed that it had no other adequate means to attain relief.

[10/06] Cuonzo v. Shore
In a suit by the estate of a passenger killed in an automobile accident, jury verdict finding neither driver negligent and denial of plaintiff's motion for a new trial are affirmed where: 1) the jury could reasonably have found that the evidence was balanced and that plaintiff had failed to carry its burden of proof that one or both drivers were negligent, despite the fact that the accident was clearly the result of the negligence of at least one party; and 2) the exclusion of photographs of the accident scene was within the discretion of the trial court.

[08/29] Kerlin v. Sauceda
In a suit alleging that defendant defrauded plaintiffs of oil and gas royalties and other interests in Padre Island, judgments for plaintiffs are reversed as time-barred where: 1) plaintiffs could have discovered defendant's wrongdoing through reasonable diligence and were not entitled to tolling of the running of limitations on that basis; and 2) defendant was present in the state, by virtue of doing business there, during all of the alleged wrongdoing, and statutory tolling therefore did not apply. (Revised opinion)

More...

Workers' Comp

[10/09] Lane v. Celadon Trucking, Inc.
In a case involving application of Indiana's lien reduction statute to defendant's worker's compensation subrogation lien on proceeds from a third-party settlement reached by plaintiff-former employee, decision to apply Indiana state law rather than Arkansas' made-whole doctrine is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded where: 1) court did not believe the Arkansas Supreme Court would automatically apply the law of the state where the worker's compensation benefits were paid; 2) if faced with a choice-of-law question involving a dispute over worker's compensation subrogation rights, court predicted Arkansas Supreme Court would follow the district court's judgment in Simpson v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. in which defendant-worker's compensation carrier for employer was entitled to the proceeds in dispute; and 3) the lien reduction statute did not apply to defendant's lien and the district court erred in applying it.

[09/30] Amerada Hess Corp. v. Dir., Office of Workers' Comp. Programs, US Dep't of Labor
In a dispute over disability benefits for an employee, an ALJ's award of medical expenses for employee's heart condition, finding that claimant-employee was totally and permanently disabled, and award of attorney's fees are vacated in part and denied in part where: 1) the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act did not support a presumption that any medical condition that an injured claimant suffers after a work-related injury is caused by the work-related injury; 2) remand was therefore necessary to determine whether claimant's heart condition "naturally or unavoidably" resulted from the medication he received for his on-the-job back injury, and whether claimant was in fact totally and permanently disabled; and 3) employer waived the issue of attorney's fees by failing to appeal it to the Benefits Review Board.

[09/25] Sanders v. City of Orlando
In a workers' compensation case, reversal of vacatur of a prior settlement agreement by a Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) is quashed where a 2001 statutory change did not strip JCCs of jurisdiction to set aside workers' compensation agreements.

[09/25] Sanders v. City of Orlando
In a workers' compensation case, reversal of vacatur of a prior settlement agreement by a Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) is quashed where a 2001 statutory change did not strip JCCs of jurisdiction to set aside workers' compensation agreements.

[09/25] Medrano v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
In a workers' compensation matter, decision finding that amount of petitioner's earning from subsequent employment must be subtracted from vocational rehabilitation maintenance allowance (VRMA) to which he was entitled is annulled and Workers' Compensation Board Judge's decision is reinstated where: 1) VRMA is not a wage replacement benefit; and 2) therefore there should be no credit against the worker's VRMA payments for wages earned during the same period the worker was awarded VRMA payments.

[09/16] Abena v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
In an ERISA suit seeking continuation of long-term disability payments, summary judgment for defendants on the basis that plaintiff's claim was untimely is affirmed where: 1) a contractual limitations period is enforceable in an ERISA action so long as it is reasonable; and 2) the contractual provision of the plan at issue limiting the time for filing claims was reasonable under the circumstances.

More...