Allison Dunn

August 08, 2022 | Law.com

While the staircase's black coloring may have contributed to the difficulty of Galef perceiving that they were wet, the university "made the stairs more hazardous by subsequently introducing, a wet, slippery substance onto them," the opinion said.

By Allison Dunn

4 minute read

August 05, 2022 | Law.com

"Several reasons warrant the Court to impose punitive damages on Harrison: (1) to punish and deter the use of positions of authority, respect, and trust to lure minors into criminal activities; (2) to punish and deter physical attacks on and attempted murder of minors by defendants in positions of trust and responsibility; and (3) to punish Harrison and deter others from engaging in the type of conduct Harrison committed. These reasons and the totality of the circumstances justify an award of punitive damages of $2.5 million," wrote U.S. District Judge Leo T. Sorokin of the District of Massachusetts.

By Allison Dunn

3 minute read

August 04, 2022 | Law.com

"The defendants' attorneys undoubtedly performed a significant service for their clients by securing a dismissal of the plaintiff's claims with prejudice—arguably the best possible outcome in the case. Such a result is also exceedingly rare, as dismissal is the most severe sanction imposed by the court and is typically reserved for only the most egregious conduct," U.S. District Judge James P. Jones of the Western District of Virginia wrote.

By Allison Dunn

7 minute read

August 02, 2022 | Law.com

"[W]e agree with the defendant and do not read the statute to apply only where both a blood draw and subsequent chemical test or analysis is done by or at the direction of police. First, such an interpretation would contradict the plain language of the statute, rendering the consent provision of §24(1)(e) inoperative in certain situations where, according to the plain language of the statute, the consent provision applies," Justice Elspeth B. Cypher wrote on behalf of the state high court.

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

August 01, 2022 | Daily Business Review

"In this case, the circuit court's ruling effectively and illogically prevented Mack from considering or rejecting settlement offers intended to avoid litigation if she wanted to retain her right to proceed with litigation under the Act," Judge Stevan T. Northcutt wrote on behalf of the unanimous panel. "Manifestly, nothing in the language of the statue prohibits a party from entertaining or rejecting settlement offers as a condition precedent to suit. Thus, the circuit court's ruling was error."

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 29, 2022 | Law.com

"Duffy's statements can be and should have been broken down into two parts. We agree with the trial judge that the portion of the alleged statement which expressed sympathy using the words, 'I'm so sorry' is similar to the statement at issue in Denton ... and inadmissible under the benevolent gestures statute," Associate Justice Maureen Walsh wrote on behalf of the Massachusetts Court of Appeals. "However, the second portion of the statement—'It was all my fault'—is not merely an expression of sympathy. Rather, it is an admission of liability."

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 29, 2022 | Law.com

It's on one small law firm to pay more than $11,000 in Virginia State Bar sanctions after no one reviewed the firm's bills or bank statements for years except for its bookkeeper, who was ultimately convicted of embezzling nearly $650,000.

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 28, 2022 | Connecticut Law Tribune

Freeman was released on $100,000 bond and is required to report to prison on Sept. 12. He was also ordered to pay $357,062 in restitution to the Internal Revenue Service and he must pay a $15,000 fine, according to the Department of Justice.

By Allison Dunn

3 minute read

July 28, 2022 | Connecticut Law Tribune

"Given our review of the relevant federal case law and the particular facts of the case—specifically that (1) the plaintiff was not seat belted, (2) the defendant refused to acquire a larger vehicle, and (3) the defendant drove erratically and exceeded the speed limit—we conclude that the allegations in the plaintiff's complaint and the record before the court in connection with the defendant's motion for summary judgment do not give rise to a claim of deliberate indifference because no federal precedent clearly establishes that the defendant's conduct violates the constitution," Chief Justice William H. Bright Jr. wrote on behalf of the appellate panel.

By Allison Dunn

6 minute read

July 27, 2022 | Connecticut Law Tribune

"The statute is patently unconstitutional. There's no way it's not," Mario Cerame said about Section 53-37. "It is a content regulation, it is a viewpoint regulation—both of which are impermissible under First Amendment jurisprudence. It is also a due process violation. It prohibits someone from ridiculing or expressing contempt for another person or essentially a business from expressing contempt or ridicule."

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read