Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Vol. 4, No. 156 – August 13, 1996 STATE COURT CASES CONTRACTS — ENTIRE CONTROVERSY 11-2-9841 City Constr. Development, Inc. v. Global Indemnity Ins. Co., et al., App. Div. (6 pp.) Summary judgment dismissing suit on entire-controversy grounds is affirmed since although the suit alleged breach of contract and unjust enrichment and a previous suit between the parties alleged fraud, the facts are clearly and inextricably related, having arisen from defendants’ alleged failure to procure performance and material and labor bonds for a hospital renovation project. FAMILY LAW — JURISDICTION Now on Counsel Connect 20-2-9842 Samuel Ned Schuyler v. Mary Ashcraft, etc., App. Div. (97 pp. – incl. conc. opinion) Although Family Part has jurisdiction over parties’ custody issues, questions of support under RURESA remain subject to the orders of the Florida courts, and matter is remanded for processing of support complaint. [Approved for publication Aug. 13, 1996.] INSURANCE — ENVIRONMENTAL 23-2-9843 Seton Co. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., et al., App. Div. (14 pp.) Absent authority to suggest that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania would consider drafting history or regulatory approval process in interpreting clear and unambiguous language in a policy, court below correctly granted partial summary judgment enforcing unambiguous absolute pollution exclusion clauses. INSURANCE — UNINSURED MOTORIST BENEFITS 23-2-9844 Alicia Riddick v. CSC Ins. Services, App. Div. (9 pp.) Since the trial judge misinstructed the jury in defining “household,” verdict against plaintiff on UM claim is reversed. LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT — UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 25-2-9845 In the Matter of Peggy J. Pegues, App. Div. (5 pp.) Where employee left her position rather than be terminated for excessive personal travel due to family illnesses, she was properly found to have left work for personal reasons and not for reasons attributable to the work and was correctly disqualified from unemployment benefits. 25-2-9846 Ida O. Spruell v. Bd. of Review, et al., App. Div. (3 pp.) Even though employee may not have said “I quit” or “I resign,” the unmistakable interpretation of her two conversations with her personnel manager was that she did not intend to return to her position, and she was properly denied unemployment benefits for voluntary leaving her employment. FEDERAL COURT CASES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY — COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT 53-7-9847 Pedro D. Ponce v. Gloria Estefan, et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (14 pp.) Defendants are granted summary judgment in copyright-infringement suit, since there is no genuine dispute of material fact indicating that defendants copied original elements of plaintiff’s song substantial enough to rise to the level of improper appropriation. [Filed Aug. 1, 1996.] INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY — TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT 53-7-9848 Griffin Products, Inc., etc. v. Sheer Grace Promotions, Inc., etc., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (13 pp.) Finding that plaintiffs have proven the likelihood of success on the merits of their trade dress infringement claim (over a pen that eliminates “red eye” in photographs) and balancing the harm to the parties, the court grants plaintiff s request for a preliminary injunction. [Filed Aug. 1, 1996.] LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT 25-7-9849 Sandy Lombardi v. Cosgrove, et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (7 pp.) Plaintiff’s allegations that defendant capped her salary, moved her to a less desirable work location and denied her the opportunity to become a bargaining unit employee, all in retaliation for her filing an incident report, are sufficient to withstand dismissal of her Section 1983 cause of action, but she fails to state a claim under either Title VII or the Equal Pay Act. [Filed Aug. 1, 1996.] LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT — REMAND — ERISA PREEMPTION 25-7-9850 Alan Goldman v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (6 pp.) Alleged discrimination and harassment based upon plaintiff’s religion and not upon his invoking of rights under his employee benefits plan is not action specifically grounded in the plan such that ERISA would preempt state court jurisdiction, and remand to state court is appropriate even though disability benefits may ultimately be a portion of plaintiff’s recovery. [Filed Aug. 1, 1996.] PUBLIC EMPLOYEES — CIVIL SERVICE — JURISDICTION 33-7-9851 Raymond C. Fogle v. John H. Dalton, etc., U.S. Dist. Ct. (4 pp.) The Civil Service Reform Act does not provide a right of review for nonpreference members of the excepted service, such as plaintiff, and therefore complaint for re-employment is dismissed for (1) lack of jurisdiction and (2) failure to pursue and exhaust administrative remedies through the Merit System Protection Board, which would have been required if plaintiff had a CSRA remedy. [Filed Aug. 1, 1996.] A Daily Reporter of New Jersey Court Decisions THIS WEEK IN THE … A recent Appellate Division decision disallowing a law firm’s lien against a former client’s property puts the issue of whether to allow the practice on the front burner of a special committee studying matrimonial litigation for the state Supreme Court. See page 1 of this week’s Law Journal.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.