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"
Commonwealth court correctly refused to apply collateral estoppel when appellant argued that consumer services investigative report, issued in response to his appeal of the nonrenewal of his insurance policy, barred insurer from relitigating whether it violated Act 205 in cancelling his insurance because the regulations which implemented Act 205 determined that the matter was not finally adjudicated on its merits until the commissioner entered an order. Affirmed.
A township zoning hearing board did not err in denying an applicants request for a special exception to use land located in a C-2 zoning district to construct a clinic as a comparable use not specifically listed given that a clinic was specifically listed in the subject ordinance. The court dismissed the applicants appeal.
Publication Date: 2018-01-16 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Stabile Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0017
Where the defendant freely granted a computer technician access to his computer, he knowingly exposed the contents of his computer to the public and, thus, lost any reasonable expectation of privacy in those contents. The appellate court affirmed defendants judgment of sentence.
The court overruled preliminary objections based on the effectiveness of service and the statute of limitations in this action involving the renewal of a default judgment, because defendant was properly served and plaintiffs failure to timely file its writ of revival affected its priority but not the validity of its lien.
Retirees execution and submission of retirement annuity option change and beneficiary designation was sufficient to effect such change in annuity and beneficiary, even though retirement system administrator did not receive retirees documents until after his death. Order of the State Employees Retirement Board reversed.
Defendant in motor vehicle accident case was not entitled to summary judgment on the issue of punitive damages where the evidence indicated he was driving under the influence of intoxicants, had a pattern of driving while intoxicated in the past, and was distracted by his cell phone.
Publication Date: 2018-01-16 Practice Area:Labor Law Industry: Court:Commonwealth Court Judge:Judge Cosgrove Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0022
City had just cause to pass over applicant for firefighter position for failure to comply with residency requirement, where applicant failed to produce evidence that he resided within city limits at least one year prior to his application. Order of the City of Pittsburgh Civil Service Commission affirmed.
In the absence of a Uniform Commercial Code definition of when a claim arising from a fraudulently cashed check accrues or any Delaware case law on point, the court adopted one of three approaches and concluded that the statute of limitations begins to accrue when negotiable instruments are negotiated, i.e., when the victims account is debited. The court granted defendants motion for summary judgment.
The trial court properly found that plaintiffs remuneration agreement with a mail order pharmacy to solicit health care centers eligible for a federal prescription drug program based on 50 percent of net profits violated the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS), at 42 U.S.C. §1320a-7b(b)(1)(B). The court affirmed an order entering judgment for defendants.
Newspaper entitled to JNOV in defamation claim where allegedly libelous statement was factually true, and where there was no evidence to support a claim for defamation by innuendo. Judgment reversed.