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"
The parties moved to file redacted copies of certain documents filed in support of the parties' positions on pending motions. The court granted all but one of the parties' proposed redactions, concluding that neither the presumption of public access to judicial filings nor the First Amendment precluded the redactions in light of the confidentiality concerns associated with publicly revealing non-party consumer financial information.
Karen Tucker appealed the district court's dismissal of her legal malpractice lawsuit against her former counsel, Simon & Simon, PC, and its attorneys.
Defendants filed post-trial motions after a jury awarded medical malpractice damages in favor of plaintiff. The court denied the motions, holding in pertinent part that defendants' requests for judgment notwithstanding the verdict were waived for improper motion practice and briefing.
The court granted appellant's appeal of the sheriff's revocation of her license to carry firearms finding that the sheriff failed to demonstrate that he had good cause to revoke appellant's license to carry firearms.
County Children & Youth Services Agency petitioned for involuntary termination of parental rights of minor child's mother and father. The court granted the petition, concluding that termination of mother's and father's parental rights would best serve the child's needs and welfare where the conditions that led to the child's placement in dependency proceedings, namely neglect by drug-addicted parents, continued to exist and were not likely to be remedied within a reasonable period of time.
Election Code expressly designated digital images of completed absentee/mail-in ballots as public records, subjecting them to disclosure - with appropriate redaction of identifying information - under the Right-to-Know Law. Order of the trial court reversed in part.
Publication Date: 2024-08-16 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Stevens Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 1623 MDA 2023
Appellant appealed the trial court's order denying his "notice of appeal." The court affirmed, holding that the trial court properly denied appellant's pleading, which was an untimely subsequent Post Conviction Relief Act petition that sought reinstatement of appellant's rights to appeal nunc pro tunc an order of the trial court that denied appellant's motion for DNA testing.
County Children & Youth Services Agency petitioned for involuntary termination of parental rights of minor child's mother and father. The court granted the petition, concluding that termination of mother's and father's parental rights would best serve the child's needs and welfare where the conditions that led to the child's placement in dependency proceedings, namely neglect by drug-addicted parents, continued to exist and were not likely to be remedied within a reasonable period of time.
The court urged the Superior Court to affirm its denial of post-trial motions in a medical negligence action arising from what a jury found were catastrophic injuries to a newborn baby resulting from the negligent labor and delivery care provided by defendants that delayed the Caesarean delivery of the baby. The jury awarded damages of $182,737,791.00, the largest verdict in a Pennsylvania medical negligence case.
Where federal courts had not previously expressly recognized a due process right to be free from incarceration based on recanted testimony, even when the government had no knowledge of the testimony's falsity, federal precedent barred a defendant from retroactively seeking application of such a right as a new rule of procedure on collateral review. Order of the district court affirmed.