Case Summaries

Injury & Tort Law

[11/19] McDonald v. Sun Oil Co.
In a suit arising out of the sale of a property containing a disused mercury mine, alleging negligence, contribution, breach of contract and fraud as a result of an alleged oral warranty that certain rock at the mine was free of mercury, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the state statute of repose did not render the negligence claim time-barred, because provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act amending state statute of limitations rules also applied to statutes of repose; 2) the contribution claim could not be brought without remedial action having been initiated by a state environmental agency; 3) the parol evidence rule was properly applied to find that the parties had reduced their entire agreement to writing and that no binding oral warranty existed; and 4) plaintiffs did not produce evidence of the alleged falsity of statements made by defendant.

[11/19] Bregin v. Liquidebt Sys., Inc
In a suit alleging retaliatory discharge and tortious interference with employment, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff did not identify any illegal acts which he was asked to commit, for which a retaliation claim could be brought; 2) state law did not provide a whistleblower exception to the employment-at-will doctrine; and 3) plaintiff did not make out a claim for tortious interference.

[11/17] Goldstein v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles
In a claim alleging that defendants wrongfully obtained plaintiff's conviction for murder based on their pattern and practice of misusing the testimony of jailhouse informants, grant of plaintiff's Penal Code section 924.2 petition seeking access to grand jury materials is reversed where California courts do not have a broad inherent power to order disclosure of grand jury materials to private litigants.

More...

Insurance Law

[11/19] Shady Grove Orthopedic Assoc. v. Allstate Ins. Co.
In a class action claim for statutory penalties under section 5106(a) of New York insurance law against defendant-Allstate Insurance Company, grant of motion to dismiss is affirmed where: 1) section 901(b) of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules may be applied in a federal court sitting in diversity jurisdiction and adjudicating claims under state law; and 2) section 5016(a) did not fall within the exception clause of section 901(b).

[11/18] Redmon v. Sud-Chemie Inc. Ret. Plan for Union Employees
In a claim for failure to pay plaintiff-wife survivor benefits due under her husband's retirement plan and for failing to provide her with plan information she requested, dismissal of plaintiff's claims where: 1) plaintiff did not submit a claim to defendant-retirement plan until 6.5 years after her claim accrued and 1.5 years after the applicable statute of limitations had expired; and 2) accordingly, plaintiff's claim was time-barred.

[11/18] Gagliano v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co.
In an action for disability benefits, a judgment that plaintiff-insured was entitled to benefits under a policy issued by defendant is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded where: 1) defendant-insurance company violated Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA); however 2) the proper remedy was to remand the case to the plan administrator for a full and fair review.

More...