625 results for 'nos:"Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits"'.
J. Peterson partially grants motions to exclude expert testimony from the Wisconsin-based corn products exporter and the Switzerland-based agrichemical company in the exporter's lawsuit claiming the company negligently approved the sale of a genetically modified corn seed in the United States before China began rejecting products containing a trait in the seed, causing the exporter to sustain $18 million in damages. In part, the exporter's motion is granted such that one of the company's experts is barred from testifying about the economic benefits of the seed or other genetically modified corn and another is barred from testifying about whether China is a key market for corn products. Similarly, the company's motion is partially granted such that the exporter's expert can testify about whether the company's conduct caused the exporter's damages and a ruling is reserved as to whether another can testify about whether the exporter's mitigation steps were "speculative or unreasonable."
Court: USDC Western District of Wisconsin, Judge: Peterson, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv321, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Trademark, Negligence, Experts
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Vera grants an insurance company's motion to dismiss a cardiovascular surgeon's allegations that the insurer did not fully pay for services provided. ERISA supersedes state laws and "presents aggrieved plaintiffs—including medical providers who have been assigned the right to pursue their patient’s health care benefits—with a remedy." The surgeon is granted leave to amend to be permitted to plead ERISA claims.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Vera, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv10071, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Erisa, Insurance
J. Cooper partially grants the German state-owned entity's motion to dismiss the German-American's suit alleging that it improperly expropriated her family's former estate, which had been seized by the Soviet Union in the wake of World War II, following the reunification of East and West Germany. The 1945 taking was not a domestic taking, and therefore this court can exercise subject matter jurisdiction over it, but the later takings did not violate international law. Germany also did not waive its sovereign immunity in this matter in a 1954 treaty. The record is not clear as to whether the German entity ever had a physical presence in the U.S., in part because of its litigation tactics, and should remaining jurisdictional questions come down to that question, the court will allow the German-American to serve interrogatories on that question.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Cooper, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 1:14cv2140, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: International Law, Jurisdiction
J. Contreras denies the employee's motion for summary judgment in her suit alleging that she was demoted, reassigned and ultimately terminated in retaliation for her criticisms of her employer's response to the Covid-19 pandemic in early 2020, and partially grant's the employer's summary judgment motion. The employee argues that seven protected disclosures she made led to retaliation, but has only established a prima facie case of retaliation in relation to one of these seven. The employee's First Amendment retaliation claim survives summary judgment, since the employers' relevant, legitimate interests in protecting the release of inmates' and staff's health information are minimal relative to the employee's interest in "shedding light on the deplorable conditions in the D.C. Jail and the ongoing threat to inmate and staff safety." Finally, the employee's motion to file a substantial portion of her filings under seal is granted as to 16 exhibits, but denied as to others, including some which included information designated as confidential by the employer "out of an abundance of caution."
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Contreras, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv2944, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Employment, Whistleblowers, Employment Retaliation
J. Swain partially denies class claims stemming from a lender's imposition of force placed insurance on a property under a reverse mortgage. The lender admitted it had wrongfully charged the property owner for the force placed insurance, but did not credit back the related fees and interest charged to her. The homeowner adequately states a claim for violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act for the lender's failure to terminate the force-placed insurance within 15 days of written notice and proof of insurance.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Swain, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv9281, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Insurance, Real Estate, Class Action
J. Donnelly preserves a Trafficking Victims Protection Act complaint that alleges the Odyssey Study Group, described as a religious cult, coerced the litigant, a 23-year member who eventually left in 2013, into performing labor and other services. The court finds the complaint is timely and adequately alleges the organization engaged in a conspiracy by threatening him with serious harm, including disclosing personal information, if he did not perform the work or attend its classes.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Donnelly, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv7686, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Civil Rights, Employment, Tort
J. Johnston grants the air ambulance service's motion for summary judgment in its suit challenging the West Virginia Insurance commissioner's enforcement of the Air Ambulance Protection Act. Using the 1993 film '"Groundhog Day" as a backdrop, the court finds the insurance commissioner's continuous attempt to declare the membership-based EMS service as being in the business of insurance futile, since the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 preempts AAPA.
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Johnston , Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv105, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Health Care, Insurance, Injunction
J. Campbell mostly denies the employers' dismissal motions in this lawsuit brought by a former employee who alleges that she was fired after complaining about a client's sexual harassment. The dismissal motions are granted as to her claim for "participation in a venture engaged in sex trafficking." The allegations do not show that the employers had notice of "a commercial sex act," as required under the federal statute. Their motions are denied as to the remaining counts.
Court: USDC Middle District of Tennessee , Judge: Campbell, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv477, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Civil Rights, Employment
J. Watson grants the RV buyer's motion to enforce the parties' settlement agreement, ruling the dealer's failure to provide the extended service contract included as part of the settlement is a material breach, even in the absence of bad faith. Although the dealer now uses a new service provider to make repairs to vehicles, the original service contract was an integral part of the settlement and so it must honor its obligation and provide the original contract to the buyer.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Watson, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv3568, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Settlements, Warranty
J. Sargus denies, in part, the mortgage lender's motion to dismiss, ruling its failure to provide any explanation for the $90,000 discrepancy between two loan modification agreements sent to the borrowers gives them a plausible cause of action under federal consumer lending laws after the lender declared them in default even though they made payments under the original modification.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv4070, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Consumer Law, Banking / Lending
J. Pitts allows several class action claims to proceed against Meta from consumers who say the social media company collected their personal tax data without permission using tracking tools on a handful of popular tax preparation websites. While several theft and theft-related claims are tossed due to the class not meeting the definition of "customers" under the law, many of their negligence claims survive. There are still several factual disputes over whether consumers were properly warned on the tax filing websites that Meta was using their sites to collect financial data.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Pitts, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv7557, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Privacy, Class Action