Monday, August 12, 2013
For readers with an interest in comparative or international tort law, Melbourne Law School has launched a new blog, Opinions on High, which focuses on decisions of the High Court of Australia. A recent post, for examples, examines the duty to warn in the medical malpractice context under Australian law.
Friday, August 9, 2013
Deborah J. LaFetra has an informative post at Pacific Legal Foundation on the Maryland Court of Appeals' decision in Georgia-Pacific v. Farrar. This, of course, is the "bystander of a bystander" asbestos case, where the grandaughter of a worker who worked near another worker who worked with asbestos-products sued for her mesothelioma. The Court of Appeals rejected the duty to warn.
Thursday, August 8, 2013
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Back in June, Chris provided a thorough summary of the Pittsburgh zoo mauling case. Yesterday, the Pittsburgh Tribune reported that the judge refused to dismiss the plaintiff's punitive damages and strict liability claims. Discovery will now begin in the case.
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
The Connecticut Law Tribune reports that a Connecticut attorney has been "charged with nine federal offenses" related to an insurance fraud scheme. The article reports:
As alleged in the indictment, Haddad, who lives in Orange, and the others defrauded insurance companies by exaggerating the auto accident injuries sustained by Haddad's clients, and the cost of their medical care, to justify larger monetary settlements with insurance companies. Authorities say more than 10 insurance carriers lost a total of approximately $2.5 million. The Connecticut Post lists Travelers, Metropolitan, Progressive, Esurance and Nationwide as being among those that were defrauded from December 2006 to February 2010.
In June, Allstate and Deerbrook insurance companies filed a federal civil lawsuit against Haddad and others involved allegedly involved in the scheme. According to the suit, beginning in 2006, Haddad and others began to "defraud Allstate by submitting bils for medical treatment that was unneccessary, worthless, and often based on fictitious clinical findings or diagnosis."
Thanks to Lisa-Smith Butler for the alert.
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
Monday, July 29, 2013
Joseph Nixon and the Texas Policy Foundation have posted "Ten Years of Tort Reform in Texas: A Review." The abstract provides:
Ten years of tort reform have provided greater access to health care and helped make Texas the nation’s leading job producer. Indeed, by recognizing the causal connection between economic prosperity and efficient, fair courts, the Texas legislature passed and Governor Rick Perry signed House Bill 4 (HB4)—powerful tort reform legislation that is the foundation of the Texas economic miracle. Yet, despite the awesome economic growth and increased access to health care triggered by HB4, members of the trial bar are still working to overturn this reform. While Texans should stand their ground and rebuff efforts to undo HB4’s successful tort reforms, all Americans should take notice of Texas’s remarkable transformation and look to enact similar reforms in their own states.
Monday, July 22, 2013
The Litchfield County Times (CT) has an article about Ralph Nader's plans for a tort museum in the small town of Winfield, Connecticut (Nader's hometown). Nader has been discussing building the "American Museum of Tort Law" in his home town since the 1990s. He recently purchased the former Winsted Savings Bank building for the musuem, and renovations are scheduled to begin in August. Nader states that he plans to have the museum open within the next two years.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
The National Law Journal reports that a former Cincinatti Bengals cheerleader has won over $300,000 in damages in her libel suit against a website operator based on a third-party's posts on the site.
The full story is behind a free registration wall.
Thanks to Lisa Smith-Butler for the alert.
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
Professor Kathleen F. Brickey, the James Carr Professor of Criminal Jurisprudence at Washington University in St. Louis, passed away on June 19, 2013. Professor Brickey was a giant in the field of white collar crime, authoring one of the first case books in the area, and studying the field long before Enron, Arthur Anderson, etc., made it popular. She similarly broke ground with her environmental law case book, the first law school text book dedicated to the study of environmental law.
I worked as Professor Brickey's reasearch assistant from my 1L summer through graduation. She inspired me to join the academy, and was a constant mentor. She will be deeply missed.
Monday, July 15, 2013
The AP reports that Penn State's Board of Trustees has approved settlement agreements with the child abuse victims of former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky. Penn State will release the total amount of the individual settlements at a later date. Over 30 claims have been presented. The full story is here.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Over at New York Personal Injury Law Blog, Eric Turkewitz has a series on perjury in PI cases: post 1, post 2, post 3. There have been stories in the past about fraud by plaintiffs; this series is about fraud on behalf of defendants.
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
One of the medical malpractice reforms recently adopted in Florida allows lawyers for health care providers in med mal claims to collect information on private conversations between patients and other health care providers without the patient's consent. Five lawsuits filed yesterday challenge the reform on the grounds that it violates both the state constitution and federal law (HIPAA). The Miami Herald blog has details.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
AboutLawsuits.com is reporting a study questioning the amount of defensive medicine in the health care system:
In a study published earlier this month by the medical journal JAMA Internal Medicine, researchers working with Veterans Affairs hospitals indicate that doctors at the government-run medical centers, who are generally shielded from the effects of most malpractice lawsuits, request just as many unnecessary medical tests as their peers in the private sector, who are far more vulnerable to lawsuits.
The study was based on the number of times a doctor requested a myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) test without sufficient justification. The article is here, but I don't have access to the study itself.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Today the Florida Supreme Court invalidates a contract between a doctor and patient, signed prior to treatment, which required arbitration and set a damages limit (of $250,000) lower than the damages cap set by the Florida legislature. The opinion (pdf) is here: Download Florida SC medical malpractice arbitration
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Monday, June 17, 2013
Walter Olson has a post on today's USSC case Maracich v Spears: "The Privacy Case in Which Every Justice Switched Sides." (Compared with Maryland v. King).
Monday, June 10, 2013
The Oklahoman reports that the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that the state's Comprehensive Lawsuit Reform Act of 2009 was unconstitutional under the state constitution. The court found that the statute violated the single-subject rule of the OK state constitution, which requires that each bill only deal with a single subject. Forbes also has a report.
The Times Union reports that the Oklahoma legislature is trying to figure out how to re-enact the provisions of the 2009 act in a manner that comports with the court's ruling.
Thursday, June 6, 2013
Back in November, a horrible tragedy occurred at the Pittsburgh Zoo & PPG Aquarium when a two-year-old boy fell into a wild dog exhibit and was mauled to death. In late May, the parents filed a wrongful death action against the zoo. The last zoo mauling case I recall was in San Francisco on Christmas Day 2007, when a tiger named Tatiana escaped and killed one person while wounding two others.
It appears (though there is a bit of contrary authority) that Pennsylvania does not follow the traditional rule of strict liability for wild animals; thus the parents must prove negligence. Governmental immunity is often an issue in these cases, but this zoo is private (despite the name). If the zoo were owned by a municipality, there would be no recovery; the code explicitly states: "Damages shall not be recoverable...on account of any injury caused by wild animals...." 42 Pa.C.S.A. 8542(b)(8). There are cases on point for injuries by a dolphin and a wolf.
Obviously the facts will have to be developed, but there is an allegation of a warning by a zoo employee that a child might fall into the enclosure before the death occurred. There are further allegations that rescue efforts were hindered by unloaded or blank tranquilizer guns. The zoo will certainly pursue a comparative negligence defense. This is a case that should settle. From the parents' perspective, reliving this tragedy in depositions and a trial would be traumatic. The zoo runs the risk of a large judgment (I think it would be extremely difficult to convince jurors that the mother was more responsible than the zoo for the tragedy, as would be required by PA's 50% comparative negligence statute) and bad publicity.
Adam Smeltz of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has published a series of stories on the case:
Pittsburgh zoo mauling case hinges on liability (quoting me)