179 results for 'filedAt:"2024-02-08"'.
J. Dever grants Walmart’s motion to dismiss allegations of race discrimination brought a driver employed by Walmart after another employee crashed into his truck, causing $5,000 in damage. The driver, a Black man, claims that because Walmart did not require the employee, a white man, to pay the damages, Walmart favored the employee based on race. However, the driver’s allegations are not sufficient for a Title VII claim.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Dever, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv226, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Employment, Employment Discrimination
J. Andrews finds a lower court properly denied a law firm's motion to reopen a case against another law firm on claims of fraud. The first law firm argued that it was entitled to relief after the other law firm allegedly fraudulently obtained years of cost orders. However, the defendant law firm sufficiently showed in court that the claims do not constitute exceptional circumstances. Affirmed.
Court: Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, Judge: Andrews, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: CA-2021-1782A, Categories: Fraud, Attorney Discipline
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. Graham finds the circuit court improperly ordered defendant to pay restitution in his burglary case beyond what he is able to pay financially, which lined up with the state's argument citing an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution expanding crime victims' rights, also known as Marsy's Law. As the state now concedes, a provision in Wisconsin statutes limiting monetary restitution in juvenile delinquency cases to an amount which "the juvenile alone is financially able to pay" is constitutional and jibes with the requirements of Marsy's Law. The circuit court's order requiring defendant to pay $26,788 in restitution is reversed, and the circuit court should recalculate defendant's restitution after the case is remitted. Reversed.
Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Judge: Graham, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2021AP001437, Categories: Burglary, Juvenile Law, Restitution
J. Stras finds a lower court properly convicted a defendant for witness tampering and for possessing a firearm as a felon. The defendant, who pistol-whipped his girlfriend and harassed her, argued that he is not a felon and that the lower court erred in denying his motion for acquittal. However, the government sufficiently showed in court that he was a felon in possession of a firearm and made several calls from jail to his girlfriend, warning her to lie during testimony. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Stras, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 23-1179, Categories: Evidence, Firearms, Witnesses
J. Southwick finds the district court improperly found a limitation in Texas’s DNA testing statute involving death-row inmates' entitlement to testing was unconstitutional. Convicted for capital murder, defendant made civil rights claims against Texas in an effort to secure postconviction DNA testing. However, new testing of the victim’s blood sample, a shirt belonging to an accomplice, nail scrapings and a loose hair recovered from the victim’s finger would not override the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Defendant admitted to orchestrating the robbery during which he and his accomplice entered the victim's residence with two screwdrivers, both used to stab the victim. Reversed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Southwick , Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 21-70009, Categories: Constitution, Dna, Murder
J. Tostrud dismisses the insured's suit against the insurer alleging that it breached her insurance policy and discriminated against her based on disabilities in its handling of her claim for water damage. The insured has not identified any facts which plausibly show a breach of her insurance contract, nor has she identified any legal authority on which to base a disability-discrimination claim. Her appeal of a denial of her motion for leave to amend is also affirmed, since her proposed amendment was not intended to identify these deficiencies. Her suit is dismissed without prejudice to allow her an opportunity to file an amended pleading and attempt to cure these issues.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tostrud, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 0:23cv2646, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Insurance, Contract
J. Sotomayor finds that the circuit improperly ruled in whistleblower claims brought after an employee was allegedly terminated for reporting securities violations because statute did not require the employee to demonstrate the "employer acted with retaliatory intent," only that he had been terminated for reporting what he believed to be misconduct. Reversed.
Court: US Supreme Court, Judge: Sotomayor, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 22-660, Categories: Employment, Securities, Whistleblowers
J. Cabret finds the superior court properly confirmed a more than $1 million arbitration award in favor of the construction firm in its dispute with the condo association over payment for wastewater and sewerage services the firm provided. In part because the association failed to timely challenge the correctness of the award within the three-month limitation established in the Federal Arbitration Act, the superior court's judgments affirming the arbitration award stand. Affirmed.
Court: Virgin Islands Supreme Court, Judge: Cabret, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2024 VI 10, Categories: Arbitration, Contract
J. Jewell finds that the trial court improperly denied the trampoline park's motion to compel arbitration of a personal injury suit brought by the mother of a minor child who hurt his foot at its facility. The arbitrator must decide the issue of whether the prior release and indemnification signed by the mother applied to the subsequent visit when the child was injured since it relates to the scope of the agreement. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Jewell, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 14-23-00090-CV, Categories: Arbitration, Negligence, Contract
J. Clark partially grants the store's motion to dismiss the consumers' class claims alleging it sent them dozens of unauthorized text messages advertising goods for sale. Some of the proposed class definitions are unauthorized fail-safe classes, and these definitions must be struck. Further, the consumers may not sue the store for not keeping an in-house do-not-call list, as this precaution would not have prevented them from receiving the text messages.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Missouri, Judge: Clark, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 423cv42, NOS: Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) - Other Suits, Categories: Communications, Class Action
J. Hoffstadt finds that the juvenile court properly held that statute does not limit its authority to issue a restraining order protecting a child to petitions filed by a parent's probation officer. The juvenile court may issue a restraining order to protect a child based on any dependency petition. But the juvenile court lacked authority to issue a restraining order protecting the child's maternal grandmother. Reversed in part.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Hoffstadt, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: B324755, Categories: Family Law, Restraining Order
J. Redford finds for the seller of a student housing complex in claims contending the seller misrepresented the physical and financial condition of the property because the buyer had been provided, but chose to ignore, documentation regarding the physical condition of the property and its financial status prior to purchase. Affirmed.
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals, Judge: Redford, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 361299, Categories: Fraud, Property, Contract
J. Williams finds that the lower court properly entered a final judgment and commitment order civilly committing the appellant under the Texas Civil Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act. The appellant contends that, based on the Texas Supreme Court's Stoddard opinion, "there are no issues that can be raised on appeal that would result in reversible error." The court concludes, however, that his argument "misses the mark." Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Williams, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 11-23-00191-CV, Categories: Civil Procedure, Commitment
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the unemployment insurance appeal board properly held that a personal-care assistant was disqualified from receiving benefits because she voluntarily left her job without good cause. The woman's dissatisfaction with her longer hours after another assistant quit was not an accepted reason to leave. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: CV-23-0844, Categories: Insurance, Labor
J. Ashe denies summary judgment to an insurer on its refusal to cover a church's hurricane-related coverage request for a full replacement of its approximately 42,300 square-foot roof, including a warehouse. The insurer has failed to sustain its burden of demonstrating there are no disputed issues of material fact concerning whether the building needs an entire roof replacement. As to the church's bad-faith claims, genuine issues of material fact remain with respect to the timely payment of undisputed amounts, and the timeliness and sufficiency of the insurer's investigation and adjustment of the church's insurance claim.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Ashe, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv3130, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Evidence, Insurance, Experts
J. Moll finds that the lower court erred when it held the husband in contempt of certain child support orders because his actions, taken in October 2019, could not be used to prove a violation of the orders, which did not take effect until November 2019 after he was served with the documents. However, he was properly held in contempt for the purchase of a car because such a purchase was not a "customary and usual expense," considering the husband owned another vehicle at the time of the divorce. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Moll, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: AC45824, Categories: Contempt, Family Law
J. McEvers grants a motion to dismiss an appeal after a husband and wife prevailed on the causation element of their legal malpractice action
against a law firm. The couple alleged that the firm was negligent in representing them in a quiet title action against the State of North Dakota.
Court: North Dakota Supreme Court, Judge: McEvers, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2024ND15, Categories: Property, Legal Malpractice
J. Hagen finds that the trial court properly rejected a doctor's claim that he was entitled to a formal review process before the clinical privileges that came with his employment were withdrawn. A valid release in his employment contract barred any claims about his appointment, clinical privileges or qualifications. Affirmed.
Court: Utah Supreme Court, Judge: Hagen, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 20220638, Categories: Employment, Health Care, Contract
J. Prescott finds that the lower court properly declined to name the decedent's paramour a beneficiary of the estate because she was not named on the will entered into probate court and failed to prove she possessed status as an "heir-in-law" under Connecticut law. She attempted to admit previous versions of the will naming her a beneficiary, but the estate's assets were ultimately disbursed through a settlement agreement, which prevented consideration of previous wills. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Prescott, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: AC45758, Categories: Family Law, Wills / Probate
J. Tow finds the trial court properly granted the father's motion and allowed the child to be administered a Covid-19 vaccine. No endangerment showing is required before a court can break an impasse between the joint decisionmakers of a minor. Affirmed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Tow, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 2024COA12, Categories: Family Law, Health Care