Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Get alerted any time new stories match your search criteria. Create an alert to follow a developing story, keep current on a competitor, or monitor industry news.
Thank You!
Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
How To Use Search Constraints
Categorical
judge:"Steven Andrews"
court:Florida
topic:"Civil Appeals"
practicearea:Lobbying
Boolean
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation
"Steven Andrews" OR "Roger Dalton"
Litigation NOT "Roger Dalton"
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation NOT Florida
Combinations
(Florida OR Georgia) judge:"Steven Andrews"
((Florida AND Georgia) OR Texas) topic:"Civil Appeals"
Appellants, the City of New Castle and its police pension review board, appealed the court's decision awarding survivor benefits to appellees, the ex-wives of two deceased police officers. In a §1925(a) opinion, the court justified its opinion and order granting appellees' petitions for review and asked the Commonwealth Court to deny appellants' appeal.
Court denied summary judgment dismissal of sex discrimination claim against insurer where there was sufficient evidence to find that insurer relied upon its consultants' determination that plaintiff's facial features did not fall outside the normal appearance of an average female. Defendant's motion for summary judgment denied in part and granted in part.
Defendant moved to bifurcate the parties' trademark action into discrete liability and damages phases and court found disgorgement was an equitable remedy, court alone had to power to determine what equitable damages, if any, plaintiff would receive and bifurcation might improve juror comprehension. Motion granted.
Publication Date: 2024-02-09 Practice Area:Family Law Industry: Court:Supreme Court Judge:Justice Todd Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 8 WAP 2023
Appellants appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to dismiss appellee's complaint to establish paternity. The court reversed and remanded, holding that a marital couple's separation prior to the filing of a paternity action does not, per se, preclude application of the presumption of paternity.
Plaintiff property owner sought ejectment of parties who occupied plaintiff's residential property at the time of plaintiff's purchase. The court awarded plaintiff possession of its property where defendants had no valid claim that they were leasing the property as subtenants and thus occupied the premises as holdover tenants.
Former employer adequately alleged existence and breach of separation agreement with employee and was not required to attach a copy of the agreement to the complaint. Defendant's motion to dismiss denied.
Plaintiff filed suit for partition of real property jointly owned with defendant pursuant to a business partnership. The court authorized plaintiff to purchase defendant's one-half interest in the property at a price that reflected defendant's equity minus credits in favor of plaintiff for various expenses and costs paid.
Plaintiff sought review of the denial of her application for social security disability insurance benefits and court found ALJ did not explain whether or why he ignored relevant medical records evidencing serious injuries plaintiff sustained as a result of her bike accident and did not provide a sufficient analysis for court to make a proper determination on review. Reversed and remanded.
Defendant nursing care facility moved for dismissal or, alternatively, suppression of wrongful death plaintiff's evidence as spoliation sanctions for plaintiff's cremation of his mother's body. The court denied the motion where the cremation occurred some two months before an autopsy report revealed a potential professional liability cause of action against defendants, and where defendants had an opportunity to examine the mother's body, and other evidence was available to challenge plaintiff's claims. The court, however, authorized d
In a §1925(a) opinion justifying the trial court's order granting partial summary judgment to plaintiffs on their claim of wrongful use of civil proceedings, the court noted that the defendant's position that the court should have relaxed its insistence on compliance with the Rules of Civil Procedure because the defendant was pro se and excused defendant's failure to file timely responses to requests for admissions which have not been withdrawn or amended was unsupported and improper.