Case Summaries
Labor & Employment Law
Contracts
Insurance Law
Civil Procedure
Labor & Employment Law
[08/27]
Local Joint Exec. Bd. of Las Vegas v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
Petition for review of an NLRB order dismissing union's complaints against hotel employers for unilaterally terminating dues-checkoff before bargaining to agreement or impasse is granted where: 1) although the NLRB was responsive to a prior mandate from the circuit court that it adopt a new rule, it did not properly apply the new rule it adopted; and 2) contrary to the NLRB's ruling, the union did not clearly and unmistakably waive any right of employees to claim dues-checkoff after the agreements expired.
[08/27]
Kozisek v. Couty of Seward
In an employment discrimination and civil rights case, summary judgment for defendants-county and county board chairman is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case under the Americans with Disability Act; 2) for purposes of a First Amendment claim, plaintiff's speech was not protected, and regardless, he failed to show a connection between his speech and his termination; and 3) a due process claim failed.
[08/26]
Duncan v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision granting reconsideration is annulled where the WCAB erred in holding that a sanction can be imposed against the Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF), if its "failure to comply with the award of attorney's fees resulted from willful or bad faith actions".
[08/26]
Kreutzer v. City & County of San Francisco
Judgment ordering employer to reinstate a former exempt employee into a non-exempt position is reversed where: 1) a government employee hired into a position expressly classified as exempt from civil service is not entitled to the protections of the civil service system upon the employee's release from the position, even if a court finds that, based on the duties of the position, it should not have been classified as exempt; and 2) when a government employee is released from employment for reasons characterized only as non-disciplinary, and not otherwise publicly disclosed, the employee's liberty interest in reputation has not been infringed, and the employee is entitled to no relief.
[08/26]
Carpenter v. Mohawk Industries, Inc.
In an employment matter, appeal of judgment for plaintiff-former employee is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and petition for writ of mandamus is denied where: 1) court declines to extend the "collateral order" doctrine established in past precedent to exercise court's jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal of a discovery order implicating the attorney-client privilege; 2) mandamus is appropriate only when there has been a clear usurpation of power or abuse of discretion; and 3) defendant-employer has not shown its right to the issuance of the writ is clear and indisputable.
More...
Contracts
[08/27]
County of Santa Clara v. Astra USA, Inc.
In a lawsuit brought by certain federally funded medical clinics claiming that they have been overcharged for certain prescription drugs in violation of pharmaceutical pricing agreements between the Secretary of Health and Human Services and drug manufacturer defendants, dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim is reversed where plaintiffs are intended direct beneficiaries of those agreements and thus had the right to enforce the agreements' discount provisions against the manufacturers and sue them for reimbursement of excess payments.
[08/27]
Gander Mountain Co. v. Cabela's, Inc.
In a case arising from a contract dispute involving a 1996 transaction between the parties, summary judgment for plaintiff on a counterclaim, finding that a provision at issue was unenforceable because it was merely an agreement to agree, is affirmed over claims that the district court violated the law-of-the-case doctrine and erred in granting summary judgment.
[08/27]
Fidelity and Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Star Equip. Corp.
In a dispute arising over a construction contract, enforcement of a settlement agreement and grant of summary judgment are affirmed where: 1) a hand-written agreement contemplated execution of a more formal agreement does not preclude enforcement of the hand-written agreement; 2) the terms of this settlement were clear and unambiguous; 3) there was no error in the district court's order enforcing the Settlement Memorandum of Agreement as a settlement agreement that disposed of all the claims in the case except the indemnification dispute; and 4) Fidelity is entitled to indemnification because defendants failed to present any material facts which would give rise to a factual dispute as to a 'want of good faith' on the part of Fidelity.
[08/27]
216 Jamaica Ave., LLC v. S & R Playhouse Realty Co.
In a case involving the enforceability of a "gold clause" contained in a 1912 lease agreement, which required payment of rents to be in gold coins, a judgment against plaintiff-owner who tried to enforce the clause is reversed and remanded where: 1) contrary to the ruling below, the clause is enforceable; and 2) a remand was necessary for the district court to interpret the clause, to determine the obligation it imposes on the lessee, and to address any other defenses in the first instance, including lessee's estoppel-by-deed and waiver defenses.
[08/26]
Cannon v. Gates
In an action claiming violations of the Solid Waste Disposal Act and the Administrative Procedures Act, dismissal of the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is affirmed where the district court properly applied the jurisdiction-stripping provision at 42 U.S.C. section 9613(h) because plaintiffs' suit constitutes a challenge to the government's selected removal action.
More...
Insurance Law
[08/27]
Fidelity and Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Star Equip. Corp.
In a dispute arising over a construction contract, enforcement of a settlement agreement and grant of summary judgment are affirmed where: 1) a hand-written agreement contemplated execution of a more formal agreement does not preclude enforcement of the hand-written agreement; 2) the terms of this settlement were clear and unambiguous; 3) there was no error in the district court's order enforcing the Settlement Memorandum of Agreement as a settlement agreement that disposed of all the claims in the case except the indemnification dispute; and 4) Fidelity is entitled to indemnification because defendants failed to present any material facts which would give rise to a factual dispute as to a 'want of good faith' on the part of Fidelity.
[08/26]
Columbia Cas. Co. v. Georgia & Florida Railnet Inc.
Declaratory judgment that defendant-railroad had no coverage under an insurance policy issued by plaintiff for a former employee's claims of injury is affirmed where: 1) the matter was ripe for review despite ongoing proceedings in an underlying state suit; 2) plaintiff did not breach the policy by refusing to cover inhalation claims; 3) defendant was not prejudiced by plaintiff's allegedly delayed denial of coverage; and 4) defendant's denial of coverage was not a per se violation of the state insurance code.
[08/26]
Fidelity and Guaranty Ins. Underwriters, Inc. v. Jasam Realty Corp.
In an insurance claims case related to a personal injury action, judgment for plaintiff-insurer is vacated and remanded where: 1) the district court's special verdict form permitted the jury to consider incorrect dates on which the veracity of the alleged misrepresentations could be judged; and 2) the court did not correct the error when invited by the jury to clarify the matter
[08/26]
Della Dial v. Healthspring of Alabama, Inc.
In an appeal presenting the question of whether a complaint about conduct regulated by the Medicare Act filed in a state court may be removed to a federal court, denial of plaintiffs' motion to remand is reversed and remanded where: 1) because the plaintiffs' action is not a "civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction," the action is not removable; and 2) the district court would lack subject-matter jurisdiction over their complaint because it is not against the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services for review of an administrative decision.
[08/22]
N. Am. Specialty Ins. Co. v. Royal Surplus Lines Ins. Co.
In a dispute between primary and excess insurers arising out of a tort suit against a nursing home, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) under state law the limits of insureds' consecutively-held primary insurance policies could not be "stacked" to create a higher primary policy limit and reduce plaintiff-excess insurer's obligation; 2) the anti-stacking rule also applied to defense costs under eroding policies; and 3) the defense costs could not be allocated based on whether they were incurred under the Commercial General Liability or the Hospital Professional Liability portions of the policies.
More...
Civil Procedure
[08/27]
Mendez v. County of San Bernardino
In a suit against a city, county, sheriff's department and various individual defendants under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 arising from the aftermath of an officer-involved shooting that resulted in the death of plaintiff's deaf-mute son, various rulings against plaintiff before and after she prevailed in a jury trial are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) there was no error as to jury instruction on plaintiff's emotional damages; 2) reduction of the punitive damages award was proper as it was excessive as a matter of due process; 3) summary judgment on a state law negligent training claim was proper; 4) an order denying plaintiff all fees and costs required vacatur and a remand for a determination of a reasonable award; 5) a sanctions order had to be vacated where the district court did not make a requisite bad faith finding; and 6) reassignment to a different judge was not warranted.
[08/27]
Khorrami v. Rolince
In a suit alleging violations of due-process rights by government agents who detained plaintiff while investigating the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, an interlocutory appeal of the denial of a grant of qualified immunity to defendants is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction where the district court's deferral of a ruling on the government's qualified immunity motion was not equivalent to a denial of the motion.
[08/27]
Sicar v. Chertoff
In a class action claim for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging the government has systematically misclassified plaintiffs' parole status during the course of status adjustment determinations under the Haitian Refugees Immigration Fairness Act of 1998, dismissal of class action complaint is affirmed where the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
[08/26]
State of Wyoming v. US
In an action seeking review of the ATF's interpretation of 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(33)(B)(ii) and a Wyoming law, which established a procedure to expunge misdemeanor convictions "for the purposes of restoring any firearm rights lost", dismissal of Wyoming's suit is affirmed where: 1) Congress intended the terms "expunge" and "set aside" as used in section 921(a)(33)(B)(ii) to require a state procedure that completely removes the effects of the misdemeanor conviction in question; and 2) the Wyoming law at issue fell short of such standard.
[08/26]
Grynberg v. Total S.A.
In two suits against oil companies raising tort claims for breach of fiduciary duty and equitable claims for unjust enrichment involving potential oil and gas reserves in Kazakhstan, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where the claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations and laches.
More...
|
