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"
In this suit involving the alleged conversion of stock, the court precluded plaintiffs evidence of compensatory damages based upon a hypothetical reacquisition where the liquidated damages proffered were based on a date almost nine years after plaintiffs admittedly received notice of the alleged conversion.
Publication Date: 2018-03-20 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Olson Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0288
Newly-discovered facts exception unavailable to excuse facially untimely PCRA petition where defendant was not diligent in attempting to obtain trial records that led to discovery of facts underlying petition.
The State Board of Cosmetologys capricious disregard of petitioners mitigating evidence, offered in response to a show cause order why her prior felony convictions should not warrant suspension or revocation of her cosmetology license, constituted a violation of its responsibility to review, with care, such evidence.
PennDOT failed to meet its burden regarding an alleged faulty inspection since the mere suspicion of faulty inspection is not enough to sustain its burden.
The alternative dispute resolution agreement plaintiffs attorney husband signed on her behalf upon plaintiffs admission to a nursing home was not an unconscionable contract of adhesion, as it was voluntary and allowed plaintiff to cancel the agreement within 60 days.
Publication Date: 2018-03-13 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Stabile Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0254
Excessive sentence challenge predicated on imposition of consecutive sentences in aggravated range upon defendant of advanced age did not constitute a substantial question permitting review of discretionary aspects of sentence.
Employees failure to explain noncompliance with employers requirements, though allegedly based on employers mistaken interpretation of its statutory obligations, supported finding of willful misconduct disqualifying employee from unemployment compensation benefits.
Court refused to grant summary judgment for defendant in plaintiffs action asserting liability for wifes beryllium exposure while dating husband who worked for defendant because genuine issues of material fact existed as to defendants take-home liability, wifes status as a foreseeable defendant and defendants successor liability.
The court granted the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement agreement in plaintiffs putative class action against energy pro-vider because settlement, negotiated before a neutral mediator, offered compensation to all class members with no appearance of prefer-ential treatment, the class met the requirements of rule 23(a) and (b) and the proposed class counsel had extensive experience with class actions and the applicable law.