News

Real Estate

[10/09] M/I Homes Reports Unit Results for the Third Quarter of 2008
[10/09] Astro Machine Works, Inc. Expands with New State of the Art Facility
[10/08] NorthStar Realty Finance Announces Third Quarter Dividend and Share Repurchase Program
[10/08] "US Treasury Must use Volume-Constrained Auctions"
[10/08] 3 Top Former Elected Officials From Maryland, Illinois and Oregon Urge Attorneys General, Election Officials in All 50 States to Publicly Bar 'Lose Your Home, Lose Your Vote' Attack

More...

Top Headlines

[10/10] Court considers case on judicial ethics
[10/10] Conn. high court rules same-sex couples can marry
[10/10] High Court Lets Airline 'Profiling' Ruling Stand
[10/10] Okla. abortion ultrasound requirement challenged
[10/10] Lawmakers meeting secretly on Palin ethics report

More...

Business

[10/01] Human skeleton in Ind. sells at auction for $500
[09/25] Study: Seniors not quite embracing generic drugs
[09/17] Medical device ads criticized on Capitol Hill
[10/10] Vultures circle Wall Street, but hesitate to feed
[10/10] Analysis: Financial meltdown hits ivory towers

More...

Tort

[10/07] Philly archdiocese warns teens of sexual violence
[10/10] Woman, 72, moves after finding snakes in apartment
[10/08] Woman says she was shot in the leg by her stove
[10/08] Judge dismisses blonde's lawsuit over brown dye
[10/08] Blonde sues over brown dye; judge brushes off suit

More...

Personal Injury

[10/07] Philly archdiocese warns teens of sexual violence
[10/10] Woman, 72, moves after finding snakes in apartment
[10/08] Woman says she was shot in the leg by her stove
[10/08] Judge dismisses blonde's lawsuit over brown dye
[10/08] Blonde sues over brown dye; judge brushes off suit

More...

Case Summaries

Property Law & Real Estate

[10/10] Andrews v. Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.
In a diversity case against defendant-corporation Columbia Gas, judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) the magistrate judge incorrectly construed the right of way agreement as granting defendant a fifty-foot easement to operate and maintain each of its pipelines on plaintiffs' property; 2) the doctrines of laches, estoppel, and waiver, as well as the statute of limitations, precluded defendant from clearing the right of way forty years after the trees were planted; 3) plaintiffs were entitled to damages for the removed trees; and 4) the district court erred in denying plaintiffs' motion for additional time to serve a jury demand.

[10/10] Grace Cmty. Church v. Lenox Township
In action filed by plaintiff-church after defendant-planning commission revoked a land use permit, dismissal of plaintiff-church's action is affirmed where the action was not ripe, as the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies and obtain a final decision before filing suit.

[10/09] Secrest v. Sec. Nat'l Mortgage Loan Trust
Judgment declaring valid a notice of default and election to sell under a deed of trust is affirmed where: 1) an agreement by which a lender agreed to forbear from exercising the right of foreclosure under a deed of trust securing an interest in real property comes within the statute of frauds; and 2) the borrowers in this case failed as a matter of law to establish estoppel to assert the statute of frauds.

[10/09] Estate of Felder
In a property matter in which objector sought the deposit he paid as a defaulting purchaser of real property owned in part by the estate, probate court order is affirmed where the probate court properly allowed the estate to retain the entirety of objector's $48,000 deposit as damages under Probate Code section 10350 subdivision (e).

[10/09] Stonehouse Homes v. City of Sierra Madre
In a property matter in which plaintiff-developer and property-owner's application to develop a portion of its property was denied by defendant-city, order of dismissal is affirmed where the complaint did not adequately allege an actual and present controversy and declaratory relief was not appropriate.

[10/08] Schwarz v. City of Treasure Island
In a claim brought under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) alleging that defendant-city's occupancy-turnover rule against plaintiff-halfway houses amounted to disparate treatment, disparate impact, and a failure to reasonably accommodate the disabled, summary judgment in favor of defendant-city is affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded where: 1) plaintiffs presented no evidence of differential treatment of the handicapped or of disparate impact on the handicapped; 2) requiring defendant-city to allow high turnover at the properties located within the specified zones would not be a "reasonable" accommodation; and 3) a genuine issue of material fact may exist about whether living in the halfway houses was "necessary" to afford recovering substance abusers an "equal opportunity to use and enjoy" the halfway houses.

[08/29] Kerlin v. Sauceda
In a suit alleging that defendant defrauded plaintiffs of oil and gas royalties and other interests in Padre Island, judgments for plaintiffs are reversed as time-barred where: 1) plaintiffs could have discovered defendant's wrongdoing through reasonable diligence and were not entitled to tolling of the running of limitations on that basis; and 2) defendant was present in the state, by virtue of doing business there, during all of the alleged wrongdoing, and statutory tolling therefore did not apply. (Revised opinion)

More...

Injury & Tort Law

[10/10] S.E. v. Grant County Bd. of Educ.
In a claim against school officials in response to seventh-grader's sharing of prescription medicine with fellow students, grant of qualified immunity to individual defendants and summary judgment for defendant school district is affirmed where: 1) Heck v. Humphrey is inapplicable and posed no bar to plaintiffs' claims; 2) assistant principal's actions did not constitute violations of either the Fourth or Fifth Amendments; and 3) "[i]f the administrative review procedures available to [plaintiff's] family had been utilized, the court below would have had a factual record to weigh in deciding whether or not the [504] Plan had been implemented" and the district court correctly dismissed claim regarding a Section 504 Plan without prejudice.

[10/09] Estate of Thomson v. Toyota Motor Corp. Worldwide
In a torts action following a car accident in South Africa against car rental company, grant of defendant-car company's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and claims against car rental company under the doctrine of forum non conveniens is affirmed where: 1) defendant-corporation did not have sufficient contacts with Ohio to support general jurisdiction under the state's long-arm statute or comport with due process; 2) the record supported the district court's conclusion that subsidiary of defendant corporation was not an alter ego according to alter-ego theory of personal jurisdiction; 3) the district court's decision to sua sponte dismiss was not improper; 4) an adequate forum existed in South Africa and there were corporate entities in South Africa which were amenable to service; 5) the plaintiffs' chosen forum was simply not outweighed by the many factors favoring South Africa; and 6) the district court was correct in determining that South Africa is the most convenient and proper forum.

[10/09] Perera v. United States Fid. and Guaranty Co.
In a wrongful death action against employer, court certified questions because it was unclear under state law whether a plaintiff could maintain a cause of action for bad faith against an insurer when, as here, the insurer's actions never resulted in increased exposure on the part of the insured to excess liability, or an excess judgment.

[10/08] Noble Sys. Corp. v. Alorica Cent., LLC
In an action against defendants for tortious interference with a business relationship, fraud and intentional and negligent misrepresentation, conversion, unjust enrichment, and conspiracy to defraud plaintiff and convert its property, rulings against plaintiff are affirmed where: 1) grant of defendant's motion to take judicial notice of a financing statement it filed was not error; 2) one tortious interference claim failed as the allegations did not show that the defendant acted without justification, and the other claim was properly dismissed; 3) fraud and intentional and negligent misrepresentation claims were meritless; 4) conversion and replevin claims failed as plaintiff possessed no property interest that it could enforce against defendants; and 5) civil conspiracy and unjust enrichment claims failed as there was no requisite underlying fraud, conversion or tort supporting such claims.

[10/08] MCI Worldcom Network Serv. v. Mastec, Inc.
In a torts claim seeking compensatory, loss-of-use, and punitive damages after defendant inadvertently severed one of plaintiff-MCI's fiber-optic cables, grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where the state supreme court modified the certified questions submitted to the court and then answered the new question in the negative, holding that the loss-of-use damages based on rental replacement value is not the appropriate measure of damages when there were no such costs incurred and the telecommunications traffic carried by the damaged cable was accommodated within the telecommunications carrier's own network with no loss of service.

[10/06] Cuonzo v. Shore
In a suit by the estate of a passenger killed in an automobile accident, jury verdict finding neither driver negligent and denial of plaintiff's motion for a new trial are affirmed where: 1) the jury could reasonably have found that the evidence was balanced and that plaintiff had failed to carry its burden of proof that one or both drivers were negligent, despite the fact that the accident was clearly the result of the negligence of at least one party; and 2) the exclusion of photographs of the accident scene was within the discretion of the trial court.

[08/29] Kerlin v. Sauceda
In a suit alleging that defendant defrauded plaintiffs of oil and gas royalties and other interests in Padre Island, judgments for plaintiffs are reversed as time-barred where: 1) plaintiffs could have discovered defendant's wrongdoing through reasonable diligence and were not entitled to tolling of the running of limitations on that basis; and 2) defendant was present in the state, by virtue of doing business there, during all of the alleged wrongdoing, and statutory tolling therefore did not apply. (Revised opinion)

More...