law insurance company

Law.com - Litigation Practice Center
Receive ongoing updates about current cases and insights into key decisions. Law.com Practice Center subscription required.

• Circumstantial Evidence May Prove Lack of Informed Consent, Says Pa. Supreme Court
  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that circumstantial evidence provided by a plaintiff's spouse may be sufficient to prove a lack of informed consent claim. Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille, writing for the majority in
• Muslim-American Files Bias Suit Against Wal-Mart
  An Arab- and Muslim-American man filed a $12 million lawsuit on Dec. 18 against a Wal-Mart store that caters to his community -- saying employees discriminated against him and fired him because of his background. He accuses Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart and three employees at its Dearborn store of violating his civil rights through threats, harassment and dismissal after complaining about the employees' conduct.
• Ruling Holds U.S. Government to Higher Standard When Seeking to Track Cell Users
  Two weeks after an Eastern District of New York judge held that the government may use a pen register to track a cell phone holder's movements, a magistrate judge from the same courthouse has held the government to a higher standard when seeking permission to employ such devices. The decision marks the second foray in less than a month by an Eastern District judge into the nascent realm of pen registers, which are used by investigators to record information sent by electronic devices such as cell phones.
• Court Strikes Down Ban on Advertising Super Lawyer or Best Lawyer Status
  Ending months of anticipation, New Jersey's highest court has struck down as unconstitutional a prohibition on attorneys advertising their selections in Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers in America and other comparative ratings guides. The court, in a unanimous ruling on Dec. 17, agreed with a special master who found last June that "state bans on truthful, fact-based claims in lawful advertising could be ruled unconstitutional when the state fails to establish that the regulated claims are actually or inherently misleading."
• Calif. Supreme Court Ruling May Deter Good Samaritans
  Would-be heroes were warned by the California Supreme Court on Dec. 18 that they could be liable for damages if they inadvertently injure a person while attempting a rescue. In a 4-3 ruling, the high court held that a state statute immunizing rescuers from liability applies only if the individual is providing medical care in an emergency situation. It doesn't apply when Good Samaritans accidently cause injuries while, for example, pulling someone out of a burning house or diving into swirling waters to save a drowning swimmer.
• Judge Rules Aquafina Suits Pre-empted, Source of Water Not Relevant to 'Purity'
  An attempt to sue PepsiCo for misrepresenting that Aquafina water comes from a pure mountain spring and not from public water supplies has been defeated by federal pre-emption. Plaintiffs in multidistrict litigation claimed they believed that the iconic picture of mountains with a red-orange sun behind them on the label accompanied by the slogan "Pure Water-Perfect Taste" meant that bottled water came from a pure stream. But they lost out because the federal Food and Drug Administration defines purity and Aquafina fits its definition.
• null: Kellogg v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
  Surviving spouse was entitled to accidental death benefits under ERISA employee welfare benefit plan where husband suffered seizure before fatally crashing vehicle into tree; while policy excluded coverage for accidental death due to physical illness, car crash, not seizure, was cause of death.
• null: Jewell v. United States
  Law firm shareholder lacked standing to sue Internal Revenue Service seeking refund of pro rata share of tax sanction paid in conjunction with closing agreement between former law firm and agency.
• null: United States v. Hagerman
  Where corporation's appeal was fully briefed before company fired attorney, court of appeals could decide merits of case rather than dismissing action on ground that corporate entity normally may not litigate in federal court pro se; while dismissal would have been justified, it was not compelled, and circumstances warranted decision on merits of corporation's defense.
• Economic Crisis Shifts Asian Spotlight to Litigation
  The story of international law firms in Asia has long been all about transactions -- infrastructure financings, foreign investment and, especially in recent years, blockbuster public offerings of mainland Chinese companies. But with capital markets in Hong Kong, Tokyo and Shanghai now as moribund as those in London or New York, a number of firms are finding an unexpected bright spot in the region: litigation.
• New Settlements Suggest Online Retailers Should Focus on Web Site Accessibility
  In the last few months, two major retailers -- Target and Apple -- have entered into settlements with the National Federation of the Blind ("NFB") over allegations that the retailers? Web sites violated the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") because they were not accessible to the blind.
• The Selective-Waiver Doctrine: Is It Still Alive?
  In the past few years, attorneys and commentators had sought to establish the selective-waiver doctrine by proposing changes to the Federal Rules of Evidence. This in-depth analysis explains why.