Filter This View

  • Pollack v. Shell et al

    Publication Date: 2018-08-21
    Practice Area: Damages | Personal Injury
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County
    Judge: Judge Nealon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0962

    There were triable issues of fact regarding the defendant landlord's knowledge of prior attacks by a tenant's pitbull and his ability to remove the dog and its owners from a rental property; however, the court dismissed plaintiff's punitive damages claim against the landlord where it was based solely upon proof of landlord's alleged actual knowledge of prior attacks by the dog. The court granted defendant's motion for partial summary judgment.

  • Fusco v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-08-14
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom | Transportation
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
    Judge: District Judge Goldberg
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0944

    Plaintiff's claims against Uber Technologies Inc. for alleged negligent hiring, retention and supervision of a driver who attacked the plaintiff customer did not survive a motion for summary judgment where the complaint did not allege any instances of past misconduct by the offending driver. The court granted in part plaintiff's motion for summary judgment with leave to amend.

  • Cholewka v. Gelso

    Publication Date: 2018-08-14
    Practice Area: Landlord Tenant Law | Personal Injury
    Industry: Construction
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Ott
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0942

    One possessor of land owes no duty of care to another possessor of land under premises liability principles; thus, the trial court did not err in finding that the additional defendant, who leased property together with the plaintiffs, owed no duty of care to them. The appellate court affirmed in part.

  • Ranck v. Coatesville Little League, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-08-14
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Personal Injury
    Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
    Judge: Judge Patrick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0935

    Defendant's petition to transfer venue based on forum non conveniens was timely and proper. The court did not abuse its discretion in transferring venue to another county where the accident occurred elsewhere and none of the parties resided or did business in the county where the action had been filed.

  • Coley v. Keystone Turf Club, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-08-07
    Practice Area: Damages | Personal Injury
    Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
    Judge: Judge Lachman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0907

    Sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict against defendant for punitive damages and for failing to follow its established security procedures. The court concluded the judgment should be affirmed.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Connecticut Business Litigation, 4th Edition

    Authors: THOMAS J. FINN, PAULA CRUZ CEDILLO

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Hovatter v. CSX Transp., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-31
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Employment Litigation | Personal Injury
    Industry: Transportation
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Platt
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0890

    Trial court erred in finding that 45 U.S.C. §56 controlled appellant's motion to dismiss appellees' FELA claims on forum non conveniens grounds and abused its discretion in giving heightened deference to appellees' choice of forum because §56 addressed venue in federal district courts, not forum non conveniens in state courts, and abused its discretion in denying the motion. Reversed.

  • Ang v. Williams

    Publication Date: 2018-07-31
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Monroe County
    Judge: Judge Williamson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0873

    A claim on behalf of a minor skier who was injured by another minor skier was not barred by a state law regarding skier responsibility. Plaintiffs adequately stated their negligence and battery claims, so the court denied all preliminary objections.

  • Carletti v. Commonwealth, Dept. of Transportation

    Publication Date: 2018-07-31
    Practice Area: Evidence | Personal Injury
    Industry:
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Pellegrini
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0868

    Defendant was entitled to a new trial in this personal injury action where the trial court erred in failing to give the jury proper limiting instructions regarding an expert's use of hearsay evidence from a non-testifying witness's deposition in forming his opinion. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial.

  • Gordner v. McIntosh

    Publication Date: 2018-07-31
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County
    Judge: Judge Nealon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0843

    Plaintiff's allegations that the defendant homeowners were negligent in the way they treated and/or maintained a set of wooden stairs such that the stairs were very slippery and that defendants had, in the past, warned other invitees about the slippery stairs were sufficient to state a viable negligence claim. The court overruled defendants' preliminary objection in part.

  • Rudolph v. Safari Club Int'l

    Publication Date: 2018-07-24
    Practice Area: Personal Injury
    Industry: Non-Profit
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Western
    Judge: District Judge Eddy
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0683

    Defendant non-profit organization moved for summary judgment in plaintiff member's action for defamation and defamation by innuendo and court denied the motion as to the defamation count because plaintiff was not a limited public figure, the statements were not made solely in connection with his termination as an employee and there was no privilege, but the letter informing plaintiff that he was being removed from hunting awards and the record book did not support a claim for defamation by innuendo. Granted in part and denied in part.