Case Summaries
Insurance Law
[08/20] James River Ins. Co. v. Ground Down Engineering, Inc.
In plaintiff-insurer's claim seeking a declaratory judgment that it is not obligated to provide a legal defense to defendant-insured, dismissal of claim is vacated where: 1) district court erred in holding that the pollution exclusion does not apply; and 2) the pollution exclusion clearly covers the claims asserted against defendant.
[08/19] People v. Meneses
Conviction and sentence for crimes related to defendant's participation in a scheme to defraud insurance companies is affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) whether the court, on its own initiative (sua sponte), should have provided certain instructions to the jury; 2) prosecutorial misconduct; 3) whether the court should have sanitized a prior conviction for conspiring to forge immigration documents, by eliminating all reference to conspiracy when the prosecutor impeached defendant's credibility as a felon; 4) insufficiency of the evidence; and 5) ineffective assistance of counsel.
[08/19] Gaeth v. Hartford Life Ins. Co.
An award of attorney's fees to claimant pursuant to a finding that plan administrator's termination of long term disability benefits was arbitrary and capricious because it was not supported by any medical evidence of claimant's physical condition is vacated and remanded for reconsideration where the district court erred in its analysis under two of the factors of the test set forth by Secretary of the Department of Labor v. King, 775 F.2d 666 (6th Cir. 1985).
[08/18] US v. Simpson
A sentence and order of restitution imposed for defendant's crime of mail fraud, involving his underreporting of payroll information for his businesses to his workers' compensation insurance carriers, is affirmed where the district court correctly concluded that the "loss" caused by this conduct was the amount of additional premiums that the insurance carriers would have charged had they been given accurate information.
More...
Health Law
[08/20] Bond v. Beard
In a capital-murder case, denial of petition for habeas relief as to defendant's conviction, and grant of relief as to his death sentence, are affirmed where: 1) defendant's Batson claim had been fully considered and properly rejected by state courts; 2) prosecutor's Bruton violations, in which he identified defendant as the party named in a co-defendant's confession, were harmless error; 3) jury instructions were proper; but 4) defendant's counsel for the penalty phase performed inadequately by failing to investigate fully defendant's background and mental health, and defendant was prejudiced by this failure.
[08/19] US v. Bonin
In a case involving an individual previously arrested for making threats to country music singer George Strait and later for threats to a magistrate judge, an order committing defendant to the custody of the Attorney General pursuant to a dangerousness determination is vacated and remanded where the determination contravened the requisite statutory procedure.
[08/19] US v. Farr
A conviction for tax fraud is reversed where during trial the government constructively amended the indictment against her, trying her not just for the crime described in the indictment (failure to pay quarterly employment taxes for a medical clinic) but also for a separate and additional offense (failure to pay a trust fund recovery penalty assessed against her personally). The circuit court does, however, reject a claim that there was insufficient evidence in the record to sustain her conviction, and that consequently she could not be subjected to retrial under a lawful indictment.
[08/19] Vaughn v. Epworth Villa
In an action alleging that plaintiff was retaliated against by defendant for participating in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) process, dismissal of the claim is affirmed where: 1) although plaintiff engaged in a "protected activity" when she submitted unredacted medical records to the EEOC; 2) however, defendant provided a legitimate and facially non-retaliatory reason for its decision to terminate her based on the violation of the organization's policies and procedures regarding confidentiality when without authorization, specifically because she provided unredacted medical records to the EEOC; 3) plaintiff failed to establish that the reason was pretextual; and 4) she did not produce direct evidence of retaliation.
More...
Securities Law
[08/19] Joyce v. Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
In a suit by shareholders of a telecommunications company alleging that defendant, while advising the company during its acquisition by another company, failed to advise plaintiffs on minimizing their exposure to financial losses, grant of a motion to dismiss is affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part where: 1) plaintiffs were bringing a direct action on their own behalf, not a derivative one on behalf of the corporation, and to that extent had standing; but 2) plaintiffs' constructive fraud claim required them to allege that defendant owed them a fiduciary duty, but no such duty never arose.
[08/19] In Re: Nortel Networks Corp. Securities Litig.
In a matter involving attorneys' fees following settlement of a private securities class action, judgment awarding 3% of the class's recovery to class counsel rather than the requested 8.5% is affirmed where: 1) appellant has waived its argument that the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act altered the fee-award scheme for cases covered by the Act by failing to present this argument to the district court; and 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding a reasonable fee under established precedent.
[08/15] CA Inc. v. AFSCME Employees Pension Plan
Two certified questions, arising from an action before the SEC to determine whether respondent-shareholders' proposed bylaw requiring reimbursement of proxy expenses should be included in petitioner-corporation's annual proxy materials, are answered affirmatively where: 1) respondents' proposal was a proper subject for action by shareholders; and 2) the proposal, if adopted, would cause petitioner to violate state law because it would in some cases curtail the directors' ability to fully exercise their fiduciary duties. (Republished Opinion)
[08/12] Dorsey v. Portfolio Equities, Inc.
Dismissal of a complaint alleging fraud arising from defendants' sale of promissory notes to finance investment schemes is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) plaintiff did not plead his federal securities-fraud claims with sufficient particularity; 2) the Texas Business and Commerce Code's fraud provisions applied only to real estate and stock transactions; but 3) plaintiff's pleadings were sufficient to state common-law fraud and securities fraud claims under state law.
More...
|
