Case Summaries
Dispute Resolution & Arbitration
[07/01]
Thomas v. Carnival Corp.
In a personal injury action involving a slip and fall aboard Defendant cruise line, the District Court's order granting Defendant's motion to compel arbitration is reversed where, under the parties' agreement, the dispute at issue must have some actual relation to the agreement to arbitrate, irrespective of what ship the claims originated from and when suit was brought.
[06/30]
People v. Coventry First LLC
In an enforcement action by the state claiming that Defendant life settlement providers concealed commissions to brokers, who persuaded their clients to accept Defendants' offers, the denial of Defendants' motion to dismiss or compel arbitration is affirmed where: 1) the state was not bound by arbitration agreements signed by Defendants' clients; and 2) the complaint stated a claim that Defendants knew that the life settlement brokers' conduct constituted a breach of fiduciary duty.
[06/26]
United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 1546 v. Illinois-American Water Co.
In an employment termination action, district grant of summary judgment in favor of plaintiff and the arbitrator's award for plaintiff is affirmed where the arbitrator provided exactly what the parties bargained for, and interpreted what he perceived to be ambiguity within the Last Chance Agreement to address a situation that he concluded the contract did not contemplate by its express terms.
[06/24]
Ruiz v. Podolsky
Trial court order denying petition to compel arbitration of the wrongful death action brought by adult children heirs of the deceased is affirmed where: 1) the court correctly concluded the adult children cannot be compelled to arbitrate their wrongful death claims as California's wrongful death statute does not create a derivative action and thus the deceased lacked authority to bind the wife or adult children to the physician-patient arbitration agreement he signed; and 2) the issue of whether the deceased's wife was bound to the arbitration agreement cannot be revisited as she failed to appeal from the court's order compelling arbitration of her claim.
[06/16]
Fagelbaum & Heller LLP v. Smylie
In an appeal from a judgment confirming an arbitration award that resolved a dispute over legal fees, the judgment is affirmed where plaintiff waived his right to mandatory fee arbitration by requesting affirmative relief in his cross-demand before the American Arbitration Association.
[06/09]
United Steel Int'l Union v. Continental Tire N. Am., Inc.
In an appeal from the grant of Plaintiff-Union's motion to compel arbitration of its grievances with Defendant-Employer, the order granting the motion is affirmed where, despite the fact that the grievances were filed after the parties' collective bargaining agreements had expired, it was clear from the contracts themselves that the parties intended to arbitrate their differences.
[06/08]
Qwest Corp. v. Ariz. Corp. Comm.
In an action challenging an arbitration order under Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, summary judgment for Plaintiff is affirmed, where state commissions may not impose access or pricing requirements under Section 271 of the Act in the course of arbitrating interconnection agreements.
[06/02]
Chelsea Family Pharm., PLLC v. Medco Health Sols., Inc.
In an appeal from the denial of Defendant's motion to compel arbitration in a commercial pharmacy contract dispute, the order is affirmed in part, where one of Plaintiff's claims did not fall within the scope of the arbitration clause at issue; but reversed in part, where, under the Federal Arbitration Act, two factually distinct injuries pleaded in the same causes of action in a complaint constitute distinct "controversies or claims" whose arbitrability may be separately evaluated.
[05/29]
Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno
In a dispute involving the applicability of an arbitration agreement to an administrative wage claim, trial court order denying plaintiff's motion to compel arbitration is reversed where: 1) defendant contractually waived the statutory right to pursue his wage claim in an administrative forum under Berman; and 2) the Berman waiver is not unenforceable for public policy reasons under Armendariz or Gentry as defendant failed to demonstrate either the inadequacy of the arbitral forum provided by the arbitration agreement or the existence of a factual basis to invalidate all Berman waivers as against public policy.
[05/29]
Valentine Capital Asset Mgmt., Inc. v. Agahi
Trial court order denying defendant's motion to compel arbitration and request for a stay of proceedings is affirmed where defendant failed to show the dispute arose out of the business activities between the parties as associated persons of a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority member and is thus subject to arbitration under FINRA Rule 3200.
More...
Injury & Tort Law
[07/02]
Hughes v. Pair
Court of Appeals judgment for defendant in a sexual harassment action is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's factual allegations fail to establish the severe or pervasive conduct necessary to pursue a claim of hostile environment sexual harassment under Civil Code sec. 51.9, as the conduct was not so egregious as to alter the conditions of the underlying professional relationship and could not plausibly be construed by a reasonable trier of fact as a threat to commit a sexual assault on plaintiff; and 2) the court properly granted summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress as plaintiff failed to establish either extreme or outrageous conduct by defendant or that plaintiff suffered severe or extreme emotional distress.
[07/01]
Thomas v. Carnival Corp.
In a personal injury action involving a slip and fall aboard Defendant cruise line, the District Court's order granting Defendant's motion to compel arbitration is reversed where, under the parties' agreement, the dispute at issue must have some actual relation to the agreement to arbitrate, irrespective of what ship the claims originated from and when suit was brought.
[06/30]
Brummet v. Taylor
In a defamation action, district court's grant of judgment as a matter of law following jury verdict to plaintiffs is affirmed where the plaintiffs presented insufficient evidence to establish that anyone in defendant's audience understood the individual plaintiffs to be the object of his statements.
[06/30]
Grammer v. John J. Kane Regional Centers
In a wrongful death action brought under the Federal Nursing Home Reform Amendments, district court judgment finding no right of action under the statutes and dismissing the case is reversed and remanded where it is clear that Congress intended to create individual rights in drafting and adopting the Amendments and plaintiff's mother falls squarely within the zone of interest the provisions are meant to protect. In addition, 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 provides the proper avenue for relief for the statutory provisions which plaintiff seeks to enforce, as defendant has failed to demonstrate that Congress foreclosed that option by adopting another, more comprehensive enforcement scheme.
[06/30]
Butler v. Gloversville
In a personal injury action claiming that Defendants failed to use a recommended ground cover at a playground they operated, summary judgment for Defendants is reversed where Defendants presented insufficient scientific evidence to show that Plaintiff's injury would have occurred even with the recommended equipment.
[06/30]
People v. Coventry First LLC
In an enforcement action by the state claiming that Defendant life settlement providers concealed commissions to brokers, who persuaded their clients to accept Defendants' offers, the denial of Defendants' motion to dismiss or compel arbitration is affirmed where: 1) the state was not bound by arbitration agreements signed by Defendants' clients; and 2) the complaint stated a claim that Defendants knew that the life settlement brokers' conduct constituted a breach of fiduciary duty.
[06/30]
Beninati v. Black Rock City, LLC
In a negligence action, trial court judgment is affirmed where the doctrine of primary assumption of risk applies to the activity engaged in by plaintiff at the Burning Man Festival, and thus defendant owed him no duty of care to prevent the injuries he incurred as a result.
[06/30]
Hornbeck Offshore Transp., LLC v. US
In a tort action against the U.S. based on the Coast Guard's decision to phase out single-hulled oil barges such as those operated by Plaintiff, the dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where Plaintiff identified no duty that could give rise to liability under state law.
[06/30]
Von der Ruhr v. Immtech Int'l, Inc.
In an action for breach of a licensing contract and tortious interference with contract, district court judgment is affirmed where: 1) the court did not abuse its discretion in precluding plaintiff's lay opinion testimony, as the testimony was not grounded in personal knowledge or experience; 2) there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find against co-defendants Thompson, Parks, and Sorkin and impose personal liability on the tortious interference with contract claim.
[06/30]
Carmichael v. Kellogg, Brown & Root Serv., Inc.
In a negligence suit arising out of an accident in which Plaintiff's husband was injured while serving in Iraq, the dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where the political question doctrine barred the suit because adjudicating Plaintiff's claims would require extensive reexamination and second-guessing of many sensitive judgments surrounding the conduct of a military convoy in war time.
More...
Workers' Comp
[06/11]
Simpson v. Empire Truck Lines, Inc.
In an action arising out of a truck accident under the Texas Workers Compensation Act (TWCA), judgment for Defendant is affirmed where the driver of the truck was not Defendant's statutory employee under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, and thus Defendant was not vicariously liable under the TWCA.
[06/08]
Zaragoza v. Ibarra
In an civil action brought by a worker against a homeowner, trial court's grant of summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's injury does not fall within the exclusive purview of the workers' compensation laws despite his employer's status as an unlicensed contractor as defendant had not worked 52 hours in the 90 days prior to the date of the injury specified in Labor Code sec. 3352(h); and 2) defendant was not negligent, as plaintiff's injury was entirely his own fault and there was no want of ordinary care taken by the plaintiff-homeowner.
[05/11]
Smith v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Board
In a dispute involving attorney's fees, Court of Appeals judgment is reversed where Labor Code sec. 4607 authorizes an award of attorney fees to employees who successfully resist efforts to terminate their award of continuing medical treatment, but does not permit an award of fees to employees who successfully challenge the denial of specific treatment requests.
[05/04]
California Self-Insurer's Sec. Fund v. Lorber Indus. of Cal.
Bankruptcy Court's denial of Plaintiff's request to give its workers' compensation reimbursement claim priority is affirmed where Plaintiff's reimbursement claim did not qualify as an excise tax under 11 U.S.C. section 507(a)(8)(E)(ii).
[04/30]
Bontempo v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
In an action involving permanent disability benefits, Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision is annulled with respect to the pulmonary impairment award where the evidence supported plaintiff's claim that he was entitled to the additional 15 percent of permanent disability benefits awardable under Labor Code sec. 4658 (d)(2).
[04/09]
Hill v. Director, Office of Workers Comp. Programs
Petition for review of an order of the Benefits Review Board denying plaintiff's claim for survivor's benefits under the Black Lung Benefits Act is granted where the Board's decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Matter is remanded for the award of benefits, as there is no issue of credibility nor any dispute that the deceased suffered from work related pneumoconiosis that led to his death, and thus plaintiff established her entitlement to survivor's benefits as a matter of law.
[03/30]
Triple H Debris Removal, Inc. v. Companion Property and Casualty Ins. Co.
In a worker's compensation dispute, district court's grant of defendant's motion for summary judgment is reversed where there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether plaintiff breached the first worker's compensation policy between the parties.
[03/30]
Del Monte Fresh Produce v. Director, OWCP
In an appeal from an Office of Workers' Compensation order increasing Claimant's disability benefits, the order is affirmed, where 1) substantial evidence supported the ALJ's determination that Claimant was not transferred between facilities due to misconduct, and 2) Claimant showed a change in his condition after the previous benefit award.
[03/16]
Wheaton v. Golden Gate Bridge, Hwy. & Transp. Dist.
Petitioner's petition for review of the Office of Workers' Compensation's denial of benefits under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) is denied, where a municipal transportation district was a "subdivision" of the State of California under 33 U.S.C. section 903(b) and thus Petitioner was not entitled to benefits.
[03/11]
Carden v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.
In an action for ERISA disability benefits, summary judgment for Defendant is affirmed, where Defendant was entitled under its benefits plan to offset Plaintiff's disability benefits by the worker's compensation payments Plaintiff had received.
More...
|
