Case Summaries
Injury & Tort Law
[08/05] JONATHAN NEIL & ASSOCS,.INC V. JONES
An insurance company's breach of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, through the retroactive overcharging of a premium it knows is not owed, is limited to only contract damages where tort remedies are unnecessary to protect the insured's interests.
[08/05] PETRILLO V. LUBERMENS MUT. CAS. CO.
Iowa law does not impose tort liability on a workers' compensation insurer for bad-faith failure to monitor and direct the medical treatment being furnished by the employer-insured to an injured employee. insurer's duty in this situation is limited to paying workers' compensation benefits to which the employee is entitled.
[08/04] RIVERA v. UNION PAC. R.R. CO.
A jury verdict in favor of plaintiff's negligence action is affirmed. Defendant's motion for a judgment as a matter of law is denied as there was a legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to render a verdict.
[08/04] FREMONT COMPENSATION INS. CO. v. SIERA PINE
Dismissal of plaintiff-insurance carrier's claim to recoup money from a third-party tortfeasor is reversed on grounds that allowing tortfeasors to escape liability, where plaintiff is subrogated to the rights of a former wife who lacks standing to sue, conflicts with the letter and spirit of Labor Code section 3852.
[08/04] H.C. SMITH INVESTMENTS v. OUTBOARD MARINE CO.
A jury verdict in favor of plaintiff on its negligence claims is affirmed and defendant's appeal, arguing that the district court erred in granting plaintiff's Rule 50 motion and in improperly instructing the jury, is denied.
More...
Asset Forfeiture
[11/22] MORTGAGE ELEC. REGISTRATION SYS. v. ESTRELLA
Orders denying confirmation to judicial sales are not final decisions.
[11/19] HEAPS v. HEAPS
In a dispute concerning a living trust, the assets within the trust became irrevocable after the death of the first wife, and therefore, plaintiff-second wife must pay over assets that she thought were the husbands, and later thought were hers, to the first wife's children.
[11/02] US v. $242,484.00
In a civil forfeiture action, the forfeiture of $242,484.00 in cash that had been seized from defendant is affirmed where the government established probable cause for the forfeiture.
[10/27] US v. CLEMONS
Forfeiture of defendant's automobile is reversed and remanded for additional findings relating to whether the forfeiture is constitutionally excessive.
[09/17] AF-CAP v. THE REPUBLIC OF CONGO
Judgment in favor of defendant, granting it sovereign immunity to undisputed debt under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, is reversed where the district court erred in concluding that the tax and royalty obligations at issue were not used for commercial purposes in the United States.
More...
Consumer Protection
[03/28] Milicevic v. Fletcher Jones Imports
The district court properly found that defendant-automobile dealership violated the Nevada lemon law where there was sufficient evidence to find that a reasonable person would have found the use and value of a car it sold to be substantially impaired.
[03/21] Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Lou Fusz Automotive Network, Inc.
In an insurance coverage dispute, the district court properly determined that plaintiff-insurer owed a defense for a lawsuit filed against defendant-insured by a third party for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
[03/11] BROWN v. PROF'L CMTY MGMT.
Dismissal of plaintiff's complaint, challenging the legality of fees charged by defendant-management company for providing collection services to a homeowner's association, is affirmed where defendant owes no duty to plaintiff.
[03/02] NATIVE AM. ARTS, INC. v. WALDRON CORP.
A non-Indian maker of jewelry, who designs jewelry to look like it was made by Indians, is free to advertise the similarity; but, if the word "Indian" is used, then he must qualify the usage so that consumers are not misled into thinking that they are buying jewelry produced by Indians.
[03/02] CARROLL v. UNITED COMPUCRED COLLECTIONS, INC.
An offer of judgment pursuant to Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in a case where class certification is pending but has not yet been granted, does not moot the action.
More... | 
