In The News

Case Summaries

Workers' Comp

[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.

[10/31] County of Kern v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd
In an appeal from a judgment of the trial court affirming an administrative decision in a claim for worker's compensation, judgment is affirmed where a volunteer firefighter with a local nonprofit firefighting organization was a county employee for purposes of workers' compensation coverage under Labor Code section 3361.1.

[09/13] Motheral v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
In a petition for review of a judgment of the defendant-Board denying reconsideration of an administrative decision calculating petitioner's disability benefits based solely on his full-time employment at minimum wage, Lab. Code section 4653, judgment is reversed where section 4454 mandates the inclusion of the market value of petitioner's living quarters, utilities, and car allowance.

Read More

Criminal Law & Procedure

[02/08] US v. Kimsey
On appeal of a nonlawyer's conviction for criminal contempt of court under 18 USC section 402 stemming from his "ghostwriting" of eight pleadings for a pro se litigant in a civil lawsuit, the conviction is reversed, where: 1) the defendant was not given the jury trial to which he was entitled under 18 USC sections 402 and 3691; and 2) local court rules, including the two district court rules on which the district court premised the defendant's conviction, do not constitute "rules" within the meaning of section 402, and thus violation of them cannot serve as a predicate for conviction under that statute.

[02/07] Farmer v. McDaniel
On petition for a writ of habeas corpus to challenge a death sentence that Nevada sought to reimpose on the basis of statutory aggravating circumstances different from those used in imposing an earlier invalid death sentence, the district court's denial of the petition is affirmed, as the state’s renewed attempt to seek a death sentence on grounds present in the defendant's first sentencing is not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

[02/07] People v. Latham
In a prosecution of parents for second-degree murder of their daughter by failing to obtain medical treatment for her in the days preceding her death, the judgment of conviction is affirmed, where there was sufficient evidence in the record to support the jury's implied findings that the parents were aware that their failure to obtain medical treatment for their daughter endangered her life, and that they failed to obtain such medical treatment in conscious disregard of that risk.

[02/07] People v. Louie
In a sentencing appeal brought by defendants who were convicted of crimes including street terrorism, the trial court is directed to modify the judgment, where: 1) no unanimity instruction was necessary on a count of dissuading a witness by force or threat; 2) there was sufficient evidence of dissuading a witness; 3) there was no reasonable likelihood the jury misconstrued or misapplied a jury instruction in a way that denied fundamental fairness; 4) the trial court erred when it imposed both a life sentence on the dissuading count and a stayed five year enhancement on the same count; 5) punishment for street terrorism counts was duplicative and should have been stayed; 6) the court properly sentenced the defendants for the crimes of arson and dissuading a witness; and 7) convictions for dissuading a witness and making a criminal threat arose from a single criminal act for which a defendant can be punished only once.

Read More

Injury & Tort Law

[02/07] Getchell v. Rogers Jewelry
In a slip-and-fall action, summary judgment in the defendant's favor is reversed, where the plaintiff produced evidence from which a reasonable inference could be drawn that the dangerous condition was created by the negligence of the defendant or its employees, so that the defendant could be charged with notice of the dangerous condition.

[02/03] Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co. v. Roberts
In a suit brought by an insurer seeking a declaratory judgment that it was required to indemnify its insured for no more than 40 percent of a state court judgment because it had covered its insured for no more than 40 percent of the time in which the state court plaintiff was exposed to lead poisoning, the district court's judgment is: 1) affirmed in part, where it was correct in allocating the insurer's liability using the pro-rata time on-the-risk, and its decision to use the plaintiff's date of birth as the starting point for the period in which she was exposed to lead poisoning was sound; and 2) reversed in part, where the district court erred in holding the insurer liable for 24 months of coverage rather than 22, since under the insurance contract, coverage ended when the property was sold.

[02/02] Lore v. City of Syracuse
In a case alleging illegal retaliation against a city police officer under Title VII and the New York State Human Rights Law (HRL) because of her complaints of gender discrimination, the district court's judgment is: 1) affirmed in part where the city's arguments regarding the availability of reputation damages, evidentiary and instructional errors, and excessive damages for emotional distress presented no basis for disturbing the judgment; and 2) vacated in part where there was merit in plaintiff's contentions regarding the liability of the city's corporation counsel, and the district court erred in dismissing her principal gender discrimination claims under the HRL on the basis that she had suffered no materially adverse employment action.

[02/01] Maxton v. Western States Metals
In a suit alleging negligence and strict liability causes of action based on personal injuries as a result of working with metal products manufactured by the defendants and supplied to the plaintiff's employer, the district court's judgment in favor of the defendants on demurrers is affirmed, where: 1) the metal products involved were not inherently dangerous, and no other circumstances justified imposing liability on the defendants for the plaintiff's injuries under the component parts doctrine; 2) the plaintiff did not meet his burden of showing there was a reasonable possibility that the deficiencies in the complaint could be cured by amendment.

Read More