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"
Defendants counterclaims for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of a confidential relationship and tortious interference in response to plaintiffs breach of contract action failed because defendant failed to allege what contractual obligation plaintiffs purportedly failed to fulfill, there were no allegations that defendant relied on plaintiffs in a confidential capacity and defendant failed to plead any prospective agreement was being contemplated between itself and a third party. Moti
Conditional class certification granted in part where plaintiff able to demonstrate factual nexus between himself and certain members of the proposed class, and where defendants challenge to plaintiffs legal theory was one more properly brought at the summary judgment stage. Motion for conditional class certification granted in part and denied in part; motion to authorize class notice denied.
Publication Date: 2018-04-24 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Bowes Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0472
The trial court did not err in limiting defendants cross-examination of his minor accuser by mandating that standby counsel ask the victim defendants question on cross examination since defendants constitutional rights were not violated by the courts measures. The appellate court reversed defendants conviction on other grounds.
Land valuation expert could rely upon hearsay affidavit from adjacent property owners representative that it would have granted access easement for development of condemned land in support of his opinion of propertys highest and best use. Order of the trial court affirmed.
Orphans court had authority to modify incapacitated persons will to disinherit legatees, since reasonable person in testators place would have responded to spouses breaking of mutually reciprocal wills and elder abuse from his children. Order of orphans court affirmed in part and reversed in part.
The court refused to compel arbitration where defendants failed to establish that the person who signed a document containing the arbitration clause was an agent who was authorized by the principal to execute the agreement.
Mother was entitled to primary physical custody of the parties minor children where 50-50 custody arrangement was not viable due to the childrens school commute and mother was more nurturing and attentive, while father was ambivalent to the childrens needs and sometimes abusive. The court ordered shared legal custody, with mother to have primary physical custody.
Publication Date: 2018-04-24 Practice Area:Family Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Stevens Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0486
Trial courts equitable distribution order and denial of alimony in the dissolution of a long term marriage was proper because the trial court considered the appropriate factors, including accepting parties stipulation as to the ownership of artworks. Affirmed.
Motion to transfer venue granted where district lacked personal jurisdiction over defendants and where more convenient access to evidence and witnesses weighed in favor of transfer. Motion to transfer venue granted.
The court properly quashed a subpoena to the opposing partys attorney and imposed sanctions on the attorney who issued the subpoena. Any information possessed by opposing counsel was covered by the attorney-client privilege or was inadmissible hearsay obtained from third parties.