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"
A motor vehicle accident victim was not entitled to recover underinsured motorist benefits from her insurance company, because the other drivers liability coverage for bodily injury was in the exact amount of the previous arbitration award, so the other driver was not considered underinsured. The court sustained defendants motion for judgment on the pleadings, and dismissed the complaint with prejudice.
Defendants motion to dismiss employees action for disability discrimination under the ADA and PHRA, retaliation for requesting an accommodation under the ADA and PHRA and wrongful discharge under Pennsylvania common law for filing a state workers compensa-tion claim failed because a hernia could constitute a disability, plaintiff adequately pled that it impaired major life activities, defendant knew of the disability and the timeframe between the injury and the firing supported the retaliation claims. Motion denied.
Defendants failed to show fraudulent joinder in plaintiffs defamation action over the publication and promotion of a book that allegedly contained false statements about him because plaintiff made a colorable claim of civil conspiracy and defendants did not show that plaintiff did not intend to pursue his claim against or seek a judgment from the allegedly non-diverse defendant. Remand granted.
§1983 suit alleging retaliatory false claims of misconduct by a judicial officer dismissed pursuant to 11th Amendment and absolute judicial immunity, where alleged acts were authorized and performed in official judicial capacity. Motion to dismiss granted.
The court did not err in imposing a post-revocation sentence, because defendant continued to have substance abuse issues and he failed to comply with his probation conditions despite having numerous opportunities to participate in treatment and rehabilitation programs.
The court refused to suppress the test results of a blood draw taken from defendant on the night she was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol where defendant provided voluntary consent to the blood draw. The court denied defendants motion to suppress.
Trial court erred in holding that 75 Pa. C.S. §1611(e) violated appellees substantive due process rights under the Pennsylvania constitu-tion and correctly found that the revocation of appellees CDL constituted punishment but the case was remanded because the record was insufficiently developed to determine whether §1611(e)s application to appellee was grossly disproportionate to his crime. Reversed in part, vacated in part and remanded.
Trial court erred in denying appellants motion to quash prior orders in a long standing dispute over the use of church assets because af-ter the appellate court affirmed the trial courts decision that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over appellants nonprofit corporation law claims on the basis that resolution of those issues would require the trial court to interpret religious doctrine, any prior decisions relating to those claims were null and void and the only remaining valid determination in the case was the binding arbitr
Unemployment Compensation Board of Review erred in denying benefits to employee who was terminated for refusing to undergo fingerprinting for employer-mandated background checks, where the employee held a sincere religious belief commanding against fingerprinting. Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review reversed.
Publication Date: 2017-12-26 Practice Area:Criminal Law Industry: Court:Commonwealth Court Judge:Judge Colins Attorneys:For plaintiff: for defendant: Case Number: 17-1853
The court granted respondents preliminary objections to inmates complaint asserting common law torts, constitutional and mandamus claims over spending decisions made with funds in the inmate general welfare fund and the destruction of some of his personal property because the DOCs fiscal administration policy did not provide prisoner IGWF representatives with the authority to approve, veto or vote on how the monies were spent, inmates claims were barred by sovereign immunity and the inmate grievance system was an adequate post-dep
1 minute read