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"
Defendant's motions to dismiss the superseding indictment charging him with campaign finance violations in two primary campaigns failed because the statute of limitations did not bar the count from one campaign and payments allowed another campaign to impermissibly spend general campaign contributions during a primary election. Motions denied.
The plaintiff bank was entitled to summary relief in this ejectment action where the evidence demonstrated that the bank successfully obtained title to certain real property at a sheriff's sale upon defendant's default on a mortgage obligation and defendant failed to offer proof disputing plaintiff's ownership interest. The court granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.
Employer moved to compel arbitration, in former employee's age discrimination action, based on the arbitration provision in the employment agreement that specifically included claims of age discrimination and the court stayed the case pending the outcome of the arbitration. Motion granted.
Fraud claim barred where arising out of fully integrated contract and where barred by the gist of the action doctrine. Parties' cross-motions granted in part and denied in part.
Plaintiff's securities fraud claims against pharmaceutical company CEO and CFO failed because plaintiff did not satisfy the scienter standard for securities fraud where plaintiff's allegations were insufficiently particularized as to the CEO's and CFO's state of mind. Dismissed with prejudice.
Implied consent warnings including statement about enhanced criminal penalties for refusal did not, following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Birchfield v. North Dakota, render refusal to submit to chemical blood test unknowing or involuntary where statement was accurate at the time it was given and driver was correctly informed refusal would result in suspension of driving privileges, Order of the trial court affirmed.
The court of common pleas lacked jurisdiction to grant defendant's motion to suppress evidence, which motion the municipal court had denied, since a criminal defendant facing trial in municipal court may only petition for certiorari after sentencing. The court vacated and remanded.
Hearing office erred in holding that the compromise and release agreement between employer and claimant eliminated employer's liability to pay pharmacy for compounded cream for claimant because a C&R agreement could not be used to avoid the procedures in the act for challenging a provider's invoice or a fee review determination that the invoice must be paid. Vacated.
Publication Date: 2018-08-21 Practice Area:Family Law Industry: Court:Superior Court Judge:Judge Gantman Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 18-0987
Trial court properly found husband in civil contempt of its order requiring him to make payments to wife under the parties' equitable dis-tribution agreements and properly imposed sanctions in the form of counsel fees in favor of wife because wife showed husband had notice of the order, he had the ability to pay and he chose not to do so and husband's arguments about wife's allegedly false testimony at an earlier hearing were not before the court since he had squandered his opportunity for appellate review of those claims by failing t