Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Get alerted any time new stories match your search criteria. Create an alert to follow a developing story, keep current on a competitor, or monitor industry news.
Thank You!
Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
How To Use Search Constraints
Categorical
judge:"Steven Andrews"
court:Florida
topic:"Civil Appeals"
practicearea:Lobbying
Boolean
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation
"Steven Andrews" OR "Roger Dalton"
Litigation NOT "Roger Dalton"
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation NOT Florida
Combinations
(Florida OR Georgia) judge:"Steven Andrews"
((Florida AND Georgia) OR Texas) topic:"Civil Appeals"
District court properly granted summary judgment in favor of pharmacy in qui tam action over Medicare reimbursement billing practices because while the government knowledge inference applied and the pharmacy could not meet the second prong of the test, the misstatements involved in using dummy prescriber IDs on PDE records were not material to the governments decision to pay the claims. Affirmed.
Trial court properly upheld the suspension of appellants operating privileges after he was convicted in New Jersey of driving after underage drinking because even if the suspension notice incorrectly referenced the section of the law, there was no evidence that appellant was misled, the notice comported with the directive in 75 Pa.C.S. §3804(e)(2)(iv)(B) and §1586 eliminated the comparison of differing degrees of impairment between Pennsylvanias and other states DUI offenses. Affirmed.
Respondent was suspended for two years because he was transferred to inactive status in 2002 and administratively suspended in 2010 but offered to provide legal services in immigration matters in Utah, where he was not licensed to practice, and engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Utah, misrepresented to clients that he was an attorney who could handle immigration issues, accepted payment for legal services, failed to provide those services and failed to contact his clients or refund their fees.
Respondent was disbarred for charging excessive fees, failing to deposit those fees into a trust or IOLTA account; neglecting clients matters, failing to refund unearned or unused fees, making direct and blatant misrepresentations to his clients about expenditures; for inadequate and unprofessional representation by not filing his appearance in a timely fashion and failing to file a pre-trial statement, attend the pre-trial con-ference or make any effort to obtain reports or depose witnesses for trial; failing to file a brief after f
Trial court erred in allowing plaintiffs to file a second amended complaint alleging negligence in plaintiffs treatment in hospitals transitional skills unit as well as the original negligence involved in her fall from her hospital bed because the claims regarding the TSU were time barred. Vacated and remanded.
Defendant could not prevail on an ineffectiveness of counsel claim for failure to call a witness where he could not demonstrate that the purported witness to his self-defense argument was available and prepared to testify on his behalf. The court recommended affirmance of an order denying defendant post-conviction relief.
Motion for judgment of acquittal in rape trial properly denied where victim testified to being severely intoxicated and passing out during the sexual encounter at issue, which was sufficient to demonstrate the victims lack of consent. Order of the trial court affirmed.
The court denied a motion to exclude admission of cellular telephone evidence where the courts order was based on an affidavit that was not misleading and which provided sufficiently accurate information to allow the court to issue the order.
Plaintiffs §1983 claim under state-created danger theory failed where plaintiff failed to plead facts establishing that state actors did not act with deliberate indifference or committed affirmative act to create danger, where plaintiff alleged that state actors failed to report continued inappropriate behavior by plaintiffs attacker. Defendants motion for summary judgment granted.