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"
Bankruptcy court correctly rejected debtors' motion to modify their reorganization plan to obtain relief from a release of legal malpractice claims against their bankruptcy counsel where the motion was filed after debtors had substantially consummated the plan.
Defendant property owners moved for summary judgment asserting plaintiff was prohibited from receiving title to the property which was sold at a judicial tax sale. Motion granted.
Defendants filed preliminary objections to plaintiffs' complaint, contending plaintiffs engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. Objection granted.
Defendant moved to compel arbitration in plaintiffs' suit alleging defendant shared plaintiffs' and others confidential personal information. Motion to compel granted as to one plaintiff and denied as to one plaintiff.
Defendant appealed the court's order quieting title in a residence in favor of plaintiff. The court requested that its order be affirmed where plaintiff's failure to file post-trial motions resulted in a waiver of all of her appellate issues.
Defendant bank moved to dismiss plaintiff's negligence action over funds stolen by a hacker and court found plaintiff's negligence argument was preempted by article 4A of the Pennsylvania UCC, plaintiff's Pennsylvania banking code claims based on defendant's failure to freeze the funds also failed and amendment would be futile. Motion granted.
Defendant drug testing service and doctor who performed the test moved to dismiss plaintiff's wrongful discharge and negligence claims in her action alleging her employment offer was rescinded after a false positive drug test and due to her pregnancy and court found testing company and doctor did not owe a duty to plaintiff to take remedial action in light of her prescription for a drug that could create false positives and testing service and doctor were not her employers. Motion granted.