Legal News

Case Summaries

Class Actions

[02/17] In re Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. Sec. Litig.
In a shareholders class action against a company and two of its high-ranking officers, alleging that the company issued false or misleading public statements about the demand for its products in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and related regulations, the district court's grant of summary judgment to the company is affirmed, where there was no evidence of subjective bad intent and, at best, a thin and debatable case as to misstatements or omissions, and thus claims under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 could not succeed for lack of scienter.

[02/17] Beer v. US
In a class action by judges who were part of a certified class in Williams v. US, 240 F.3d 1019 (Fed. Cir. 2001), involving the question of whether various congressional enactments violate the Compensation Clause by reducing the compensation of Article III federal judges: 1) due process did not allow the plaintiffs' claims to be precluded by Williams in the absence of notice of the Williams class; but 2) the Williams decision denying relief controlled the disposition of the appeal, so the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims is affirmed.

[02/09] Skilstaf, Inc. v. CVS Caremark Corp.
In a putative class action against retail drug stores filed by a plaintiff who had been part of a previously settled class action against a wholesale prescription-drug distributor and a publisher of information about prescription drugs, the district court's dismissal of the complaint is affirmed, where: 1) the district court properly considered the evidence the parties presented and concluded that a covenant not to sue in the settlement agreement was intended to bar against third parties claims that were related to the claims released; 2) enforcing the prior judgment and settlement agreement against the plaintiff, including the covenant not to sue, did not violate the plaintiff's due process rights; and 3) the elements of issue preclusion were met.

[02/08] Ruiz v. Affinity Logistics Corp.
In a class action for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and California laws, the district court's judgment in favor of the defendant is vacated, where: 1) the issue of whether the district court properly applied California's choice of law framework was not waived; 2) the district court erred when it concluded that Georgia law applied; 3) the parties' choice of Georgia law was unenforceable in California; and 4) under California's choice of law framework, the law of California applied.

Read More

Injury & Tort Law

[02/21] Dahar v. Holland Ladder & Manufacturing Co.
On a claim under Labor Law section 240(1) brought by a worker injured when he fell from a ladder in a factory while cleaning a product manufactured by his employer, the Supreme Court's grant of summary judgment dismissing the claim, affirmed by the Appellate Division, is affirmed, where the plaintiff was not engaged in an activity the statute protects.

[02/21] Posner v. Lewis
In an action for prima facie tort and tortious interference with prospective contractual relations stemming from pressure and influence exerted by the defendants upon school officials who denied the plaintiff tenure, the order of the Appellate Division denying the defendants' motion to dismiss is affirmed, where the absolute immunity from civil liability for instigating official action articulated in Brandt v Winchell, 3 NY2d 628 (1958) could not be extended to protect the alleged course of conduct, which involved blackmail, intimidation and threatening conduct allegedly directed at the plaintiff.

[02/21] Thomas H. v. Paul B.
In a defamation action alleging that the defendants falsely and maliciously stated that the plaintiff had raped and molested the defendants' daughter, the Appellate Division's grant of summary judgment to the defendants is reversed In light of factual discrepancies, where: 1) under the circumstances alleged, a reasonable listener would have understood that the defendants intended to label the plaintiff as a child rapist; and 2) the alleged statements would be actionable even if they were couched in the form of an opinion and even if they were derived from what the defendants' daughter told them.

[02/17] American States Insurance Co. v. LaFlam
In a dispute over whether an insurance company was liable to pay a settlement amount under an uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) policy issued to an injured driver's employer and containing provisions that imposed a three-year contractual limitations period on UM/UIM claims and specified that the limitations period began to run on the date of the accident, the following question is certified to the Rhode Island Supreme Court: In light of the UM/UIM statute and Rhode Island public policy, would Rhode Island enforce the two provisions of the contractual limitations clause in this case?

Read More

Labor & Employment Law

[02/21] Dahar v. Holland Ladder & Manufacturing Co.
On a claim under Labor Law section 240(1) brought by a worker injured when he fell from a ladder in a factory while cleaning a product manufactured by his employer, the Supreme Court's grant of summary judgment dismissing the claim, affirmed by the Appellate Division, is affirmed, where the plaintiff was not engaged in an activity the statute protects.

[02/16] Wachovia Securities, LLC v. Brand
On a motion to confirm an arbitration award in favor of former employees who asserted that their former employer's claims against them were frivolous, the decision of the district court upholding the award is affirmed, where: 1) the arbitration panel was not compelled to follow state procedural mandates in the arbitration; 2) even if the state procedures did apply in arbitration, the employer did not allege misconduct by the arbitrators; 3) the employer did not demonstrate that the arbitrators manifestly disregarded the law when they awarded the employees $1.1 million in attorneys' fees and costs under the South Carolina Frivolous Civil Proceedings Act.

[02/16] Ajamian v. CantorCO2e, L.P.
A trial court order denying a petition to compel arbitration under an employment contract is affirmed, where: 1) the employer failed to establish that the breadth of the arbitration provision constituted clear and unmistakable evidence of an intent to delegate issues of the provision's enforceability to the arbitration panel; 2) the trial court did not err in ruling that the entirety of the arbitration provision was unenforceable on the grounds of unconscionability; and 3) the petitioner did not become bound by an arbitration provision in the company handbook after the termination of the employment agreement.

[02/16] Stuto v. Kerber
By memorandum, an order of the Appellate Division dismissing a suit for unpaid wages is affirmed, as Business Corporation Law section 630 applies to only domestic corporations, and not to foreign corporations.

Read More

Workers' Comp

[02/16] Allied Interstate, Inc. v. Sessions Payroll Management, Inc.
In a suit for breach of contract and the common counts of account stated and open book account brought by the successor to a workers' compensation insurer against a payroll company that had been sold and reacquired, the trial court's judgment against the owner of the company is affirmed, where: 1) a 121 percent experience modifier was duly authorized, and the record would not permit the trial court to make the broad-ranging and technical determination that workers' compensation insurance issued to a payroll company should reflect a carryover experience rating; and 2) the change in ownership of the payroll company did not compel policy cancellation.

[02/09] Matter of Cappellino
On a claim for death benefits under the Workers' Compensation Law, the decision of the appellate division in favor of the defendant is reversed and the case remitted to that court to remand to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings, where there was an undisputed finding that the employer untimely filed the notice of controversy and there was no showing of good cause or other reason to excuse the failure, so that the employer should have been precluded from offering its physician's testimony to dispute claimant's evidence on the issue of causation.

[01/11] Pacific Operators Offshore, LLP v. Valladolid
In an appeal from a judgment of the appeals court vacating an administrative dismissal of respondent's Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) claim for benefits as a surviving spouse, judgment is affirmed where a claimant seeking benefits under the OCSLA must establish a substantial nexus between the injury and extractive operations on the shelf.

[12/13] In the Matter of Elrac, Inc. v. Exum
In an appeal from a judgment of the appellate division permitting arbitration of a claim by plaintiff-employee for uninsured motorist benefits, judgment is affirmed because a self-insured employer whose employee is involved in an automobile accident may be liable to that employee for uninsured motorist benefits, notwithstanding the exclusivity provision of the Workers' Compensation Law.

Read More