Filter This View

  • Newsuan v. Republic Serv. Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-07-08
    Practice Area: Discovery | Personal Injury
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Legal Services
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0776

    Trial court erred in ordering production of defendant's corporate counsel's interview notes of 16 potential employee fact witnesses, in plaintiff's personal injury action, because while defendant's attorney-client privilege claim failed, defendant possessed a privilege over the communications supplied at the behest of corporate counsel to assist him in advising employer in the present litigation. Order vacated.

  • Rice v. Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown

    Publication Date: 2019-07-01
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0711

    Trial court erred in dismissing appellant's action for fraud and civil conspiracy against diocese and diocesan officials because defendants were not entitled to judgment on pleadings since it was for the jury to determine if appellant exercised reasonable diligence to toll the statute of limitations, if defendants' silence was fraudulent concealment and if appellant sufficiently alleged a fiduciary relationship. Reversed.

  • Wise v. Huntingdon County Housing Dev. Corp.

    Publication Date: 2019-07-01
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0763

    Trial court properly found that public housing authority's alleged failure to illuminate the sidewalk in a public housing complex at night did not create an artificial condition or defect of commonwealth realty for which the housing authority could be liable in appellant's action for injuries from her fall on the sidewalk. Affirmed.

  • Smith v. Wells

    Publication Date: 2019-06-24
    Practice Area: Motor Vehicle Torts | Personal Injury
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0726

    Trial court erred in sending the question of negligence to the jury in an automobile accident case because defendant disobeyed the second clause of 72 Pa. C.S.A. §3361 by driving at a speed that prevented him from fully braking before striking plaintiff's car and he committed negligence per se. Vacated and reversed.

  • Fox v. Smith

    Publication Date: 2019-06-10
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Pellegrini
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0661

    Defamation plaintiff could file suit in any county where a third-party who personally knew the plaintiff read an allegedly defamatory internet posting and understood such posting to be detrimental to the plaintiff's reputation. Order of the trial court affirmed.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Florida Affirmative Defenses and Procedural Objections: With Forms 2024

    Authors: Joshua B. Spector, Paul D. Turner

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Roth v. Target Corp.

    Publication Date: 2019-06-10
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Retail
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Pappert
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0685

    Plaintiff moved to remand her slip and fall action to state court asserting defendant's notice of removal was untimely and the court remanded because the complaint informed defendant to a substantial degree of specificity that the value of plaintiff's claim exceeded $75,000. Motion granted.

  • Burrell v. Streamlight, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-06-03
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Manufacturing | Recruitment and Staffing
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Montgomery County
    Judge: Judge Saltz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0596

    A worker qualified as a borrowed servant, so the employer was immune from liability for negligence, because the worker had already received compensation under the Workers' Compensation Act.

  • Shirey v. Berks Area Reading Transp. Auth.

    Publication Date: 2019-05-20
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: State and Local Government
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Leavitt
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0564

    Trial court properly granted summary judgment to association and transport authority in appellant's slip and fall action because appellant's evidence did not establish a prima facie case of negligence by association and failed to allege authority's actions fell under an enumerated exception to governmental immunity under the TCA. Affirmed.

  • Livingston v. Greyhound Lines Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-05-20
    Practice Area: Motor Vehicle Torts | Personal Injury
    Industry: Transportation
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Colins
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0567

    Trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding certain evidence or in denying a mistrial and the evidence supported the jury's compensatory and punitive damages award in bus accident case in which company was vicariously liable for driver's action. Affirmed.

  • John v. Philadelphia Pizza Team, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-05-20
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Food and Beverage
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Murray
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0570

    Trial court properly dismissed appellant's complaint asserting negligent training and supervision, intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress over restaurant employee's use of an offensive racial term because the trial court properly found that employee's behavior did not rise to the level of extreme and outrageous conduct Affirmed.