456 results for 'court:"USDC Maryland"'.
J. Boardman denies a loan originator and a third-party lender’s motion to compel arbitration in this contract dispute brought by a class of consumers. The class seeks damages and declaration the loan agreements are void and not enforceable. The originator and lender’s seek arbitration under the arbitration clause. The promise in the arbitration policy is illusory and the contract is not enforceable.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Boardman, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv2156, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Arbitration, Banking / Lending, Contract
J. Chuang grants, in part, a citizen’s motion to compel discovery and compliance with subpoena against five of six internet domain registrar companies. The citizen alleges he properly served each of the registrars with a subpoena, but they have failed to comply. The court finds that one registerer was improperly served and must be served by certified mail, restricted delivery or any other proper means consistent with federal and state laws. Therefore, the other four registers the citizen is directed to file a state either voluntarily dismissing the claims or showing cause why the should not dismiss this case.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Chuang, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 8:20cv1066, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Discovery
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. Russell grants, in part, a manufacturer’s motion to dismiss this products liability, tort, and contract dispute brought by several solar companies. The solar companies request punitive damages and allege the manufacturer sold defective electric power safety cutoff devices, which overheated and failed in multiple projects, creating a high risk of fire and electrocution. The solar companies failed to allege they had a fiduciary or confidential relationship nor that the manufacturer mislead partial or fragmentary statements. Therefore, the fraudulent concealment is dismissed, and the manufacturer must answer the amended complaint. The court will deny the request punitive damages because the burden at this stage has been met on clear and convincing evidence.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Russell, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1606, NOS: Contract Product Liability - Contract, Categories: Civil Procedure, Negligence, Product Liability
J. Xinnis grants a former employee’s motion for leave to file surreply and his cross-motion for summary judgment in this employment contract dispute brought by a staffing agency. The staffing agency alleges the employee sent confidential company information to his personal email address before starting a position with a competitor. In this second amended complaint, the staffing agency claims breach of contract, breach of duty of loyalty and conversion. The agency fails to show the employee deprived the corporation of a record that could be returned, offers no evidence that customers were solicited, and there is no evidence that he ever had exclusive possession of records. The agency’s motion for summary judgement is denied on all claims.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Xinis, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 8:22cv1516, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Employment, Contract
J. Boardman grants a biotechnology firm’s motion to dismiss this RICO and fraud lawsuit that alleges the maker funneled kickbacks to pharmacies who referred patients to expensive medical services for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. United Healthcare has not plausibly alleged the scheme continued after January 2014, failed to plead the indirect purchasing rule and its mail and wire fraud allegations are not pleaded in detail. Therefore, the claims are time-barred and dismissed with prejudice.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Boardman, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 8:22cv2948, NOS: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) - Other Suits, Categories: Fraud, Health Care, Racketeering
J. Xinis grants, in part, a credit union, a law firm and its attorney’s motion for summary judgment in this contract dispute claiming the claims are barred by res judicata because this case was fairly litigated in state court. The borrower alleged the attorney had acted as an unlicensed debt collector for the credit union during the state litigation when the state and judge were dismissed from all claims. The borrower’s contract claims are the same as they were in state court, the attorney is not a state actor because he represented the credit union, and no plausible interference can be found. All claims but the breach of contract one are dismissed. The borrower’s motion to strike answer and his motion to reconsider dismissal of the judge and state are denied, but she has 21 days to amend the complaint.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Xinis, Filed On: March 22, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv1667, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Debt Collection, Banking / Lending, Contract
J. Xinis grants, in part, the insurers motion to dismiss this healthcare insurance coverage dispute brought by two surgery centers. The surgery centers allege the insurers violated MPCA and ERISA by denying close to 600 healthcare benefit claims. The court granted the parties many times to cure pleading deficiencies and the surgery centers never complained during discovery. Therefore, the surgery centers cannot cure the deficiencies moving forward to the dismissed claims before this amended complaint but may seek leave to amend the alternative equitable theory of relief by the assignees.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Xinis, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 8:21cv2680, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Health Care, Insurance
J. Rubin grants, in part, the NFL benefit plan and its trustees and commissioner’s motion to dismiss a class of retired NFL players’ lawsuit against the disability and neurocognitive plan, claiming they were wrongly denied benefits. The players allege claims under ERISA for failure to provide notice, denial of right to full and fair review, and breach of fiduciary duty. The trustees and commissioner are dismissed from the failure of notice and denial of right to full and fair review claims. The fiduciary duty claim, as asserted against the benefit plan and its trustees and commissioner, is dismissed because the players did not allege misrepresented the process for obtaining coverage and denied in all other respects.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Rubin, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv358, NOS: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) - Labor, Categories: Erisa, Fiduciary Duty
J. Russell partially grants cross-motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim in this ongoing suit concerning breach of contract and trade secrets between an insurer and a former employee. The employee argues the non-solicitation restrictions shouldn’t be enforceable because Maryland courts generally do not favor “agreements that restrict former employees from soliciting all clients of a former employer, rather than only those with whom the former employer worked directly.” However, the company does not allege the employee’s position within the company, her sales or exposure to customers making the agreement overbroad and unenforceable as matter of state law. The employee must answer the complaint.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Russell, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv961, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, Trade Secrets, Contract
J. Bredar grants a law firm’s motion to dismiss its former employee’s religious discrimination claims arising from its denial of her religious exemption from the firm’s Covid-19 vaccination mandate. She claims religious discrimination, ADA violations and wrongful termination after refusing to accommodate a religious exemption, even though she agreed to practice all other means of preventative practices in the workplace. The employee fails to plausibly allege the firm’s behavior was discriminatory, but she may file an amended complaint within 21 days.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Bredar, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2717, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Covid-19, Employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Gallagher grants, in part, two medical device firms’ motion to exclude a relator’s expert in the allegations of violations of the False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Statute. The complaint claims that the firms used a surgeon locator on their website to market potential clients for the Lap-Band product. The relator’s expert has almost 20 years of experience as an accountant and fraud examiner with certification in healthcare compliance. The expert matched the firms’ spreadsheets to the Medicare and Medicaid procedures for the calculations regarding the amount of “inducement-tainted Lap-Band devices.” He fails to account for causation means in the claims at issue are irrelevant and offer no factfinder value. Therefore, the “number of claims” opinions are denied and will not be presented to the jury.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Gallagher, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 1:17cv668, NOS: False Claims Act - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Fraud, Experts, False Claims
J. Coulson grants, in part, Tractor Supply’s motion for summary judgment in this personal injury suit brought by a married couple. The husband who was employed by a third-party logistics company as a freight handler was injured when a third-party staffing company employee ran into him with a pallet jack. The couple claims vicarious negligence, negligent entrustment, negligent hiring, retention, and supervision and loss of consortium. Tractor Supply argues they did not employ either of the third-party employees, but a reasonable jury could find that the staffing company employee was in fact employed by being on the premises. The couples’ negligence claims are dismissed for lack of a genuine dispute. The parties shall confer and inform the court if they will or will not participate in a settlement conference regarding Tractor Supply’s third-party complaint against the staffing company employee for discovery.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Coulson, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1078, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Tort, Negligence, Discovery
J. Bennett grants the individual members of the Maryland Alcohol, Tobacco, and Cannabis Commission and denies the commission, its executive director and the attorney general’s motion to dismiss improper defendants in this Interstate Commerce Act complaint brought by a citizen and two out-of-state breweries. The citizen and breweries argue that the commission has unconstitutionally allowed in-state alcohol manufactures to ship their product directly to consumers, while prohibiting the out-of-state brewers from doing the same. The Direct Shipping Act is scheduled to expire June 30, 2024, and at that time this case may be dismissed. Therefore, until the direct shipping act expires the motion to dismiss the complaint in full is denied.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Bennett, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2045, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: Commerce, Constitution
J. Coulson recommends granting in part a home medical company’s motion for default judgment in this counterclaim contract dispute brought by a supply company. The counterclaim for breach of contract should be granted for liability against the supply company. However, the claims for negligent or intentional misrepresentation and promissory estoppel should be denied. It is also recommended that the medical company be awarded over $2.7 million in damages for the actual profits for the sale of medical gowns.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Coulson, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv2479, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Damages, Contract
J. Hurson grants, in part, a purchaser’s motion to dismiss this fraud dispute brought by a horse owner for conversion, fraud, theft and conspiracy claims. The horse owner had given the independent contractor approval to sell this thoroughbred horse at auction, but it was sold in a private sale to the purchaser’s agent without permission. He has demanded the horse to be returned and not accepted the money paid to the contractor. Therefore, the conversion claim survives because there is a plausible claim by the purchaser alleging physical dominion or control. All other claims are dismissed, and the owner has 14 days to leave to amend the complaint.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Hurson, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1009, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Fraud, Conversion