Insurance Bad Faith, Peer Review to Highlight Supreme Court Session
With the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's argument session scheduled to begin Tuesday, the justices are set to consider a wide range of high-profile topics, from the requirement for proving an insurance carrier acted in bad faith to the discoverability of peer review documents.
April 03, 2017 at 10:14 AM
4 minute read
With the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's argument session scheduled to begin Tuesday, the justices are set to consider a wide range of high-profile topics, from the requirement for proving an insurance carrier acted in bad faith to the discoverability of peer review documents.
The argument session is set to take place in Pittsburgh, and the justices are scheduled to hear a total of 10 matters between Tuesday and Wednesday.
|Discipline
The argument session is expected to begin with two disciplinary proceedings, one of which deals with former Washington County Court of Common Pleas Judge Paul Pozonsky. Pozonsky was placed on temporary suspension in August 2015 after he pleaded guilty to charges related to stealing cocaine out of evidence.
|Peer Review
Later on Tuesday, the justices are set to hear arguments in Reginelli v. Boggson the issue of whether peer review documents prepared by a health care facility's third-party contractor are privileged under the Pennsylvania Peer Review Protection Act.
Attorneys who handle medical malpractice cases told the Law Weekly last year that, while there is plenty of trial and intermediate court case law on peer review privilege, it's rare for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue, and the ruling could have significant impact on health care facilities that use contracted medical professionals.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Phila. Attorney Hit With Ogletree Deakins' $32K Bill for Failing to Comply With Court Orders
4 minute read
Federal Judge Rejects Lyft's 'Competitive Harm' Claims in Attempt to Seal Safety Procedures, Storage Information
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Bridge the Communication Gap: The Benefits of Having (and Being) a Bilingual Mediator
- 2CFIUS Is Locked and Loaded, but What Lies Ahead for CFIUS Enforcement Activity?
- 3Deluge of Trump-Leary Government Lawyers Join Job Market, Setting Up Free-for-All for Law Firm, In-House Openings
- 49 Attorneys Sanctioned in Texas
- 5Unpaid Real Estate Taxes; License To Enter Adjoining Property: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
