Case Summaries

Family Law

[07/01] Jenkins v. Jenkins
In a petition under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction seeking the return of Petitioner's son to her custody in Israel, judgment for Respondent is affirmed where Petitioner failed to establish that there was an actual "removal or retention" by Respondent or that the alleged retention was "wrongful."

[06/26] Charisma R. v. Christina S.
In a child custody dispute, trial court orders declaring plaintiff a presumed parent of the child and establishing a schedule for reunification is affirmed where: 1) substantial evidence supports the finding that the Family Code sec. 7611(d) parentage presumption applies, as the record shows that plaintiff actively participated in the child's conception and cared for her following birth, the limited duration of her parenting of the child does not defeat plaintiff's claim to presumed parent status, and plaintiff received the child into her home and openly held her out as her natural child; 2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding there is no basis to rebut the parentage presumption as substantial evidence supports the finding that the Elisa B. factors are present and that plaintiff actively participated in the child's conception with the understanding she would parent with defendant, and no other facts justified rebuttal of the parentage presumption; and 3) defendant's equal protection claim fails as she has not shown that a case involving a man in plaintiff's circumstances would be decided any differently under the law, and failed to meet her burden of showing that the order declaring plaintiff the second parent was an unconstitutional infringement of her state and federal rights to substantive due process.

[06/25] Batlan v. Bledsoe
In a bankruptcy trustee's motion to avoid a transfer made pursuant to a state court judgment dissolving the Debtor's marriage, the order denying the trustee's motion is affirmed where, under Oregon law, a party who challenges a dissolution judgment must allege and prove "extrinsic fraud," and the trustee failed to do so.

More...

Dispute Resolution & Arbitration

[07/01] Thomas v. Carnival Corp.
In a personal injury action involving a slip and fall aboard Defendant cruise line, the District Court's order granting Defendant's motion to compel arbitration is reversed where, under the parties' agreement, the dispute at issue must have some actual relation to the agreement to arbitrate, irrespective of what ship the claims originated from and when suit was brought.

[06/30] People v. Coventry First LLC
In an enforcement action by the state claiming that Defendant life settlement providers concealed commissions to brokers, who persuaded their clients to accept Defendants' offers, the denial of Defendants' motion to dismiss or compel arbitration is affirmed where: 1) the state was not bound by arbitration agreements signed by Defendants' clients; and 2) the complaint stated a claim that Defendants knew that the life settlement brokers' conduct constituted a breach of fiduciary duty.

[06/26] United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 1546 v. Illinois-American Water Co.
In an employment termination action, district grant of summary judgment in favor of plaintiff and the arbitrator's award for plaintiff is affirmed where the arbitrator provided exactly what the parties bargained for, and interpreted what he perceived to be ambiguity within the Last Chance Agreement to address a situation that he concluded the contract did not contemplate by its express terms.

More...

Legal Malpractice

[07/01] Martorana v. Marlin & Saltzman
Trial court judgment sustaining the demurrers of Class Counsel is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff is collaterally estopped from pursuing a malpractice claim against Class Counsel based on the theory that counsel breached their duty of care to the class by failing to negotiate a different settlement notice procedure than that approved by the trial court in the prior action; and 2) plaintiff's argument that Class Counsel breached their duty of care by failing to contact him specifically once they knew or should have known that he had not submitted a timely claim form fails, as there is no authority imposing such an obligation on counsel in a class action suit. The court's award of sanctions to plaintiff's former employer Allstate under Code of Civil Procedure sec. 128.7 is reversed where Allstate did not satisfy the safe harbor requirements of the statute in seeking monetary sanctions against plaintiff and his counsel.

[06/29] Bakery Machinery & Fabrication, Inc. v. Traditional Baking, Inc.
District court order denying plaintiff's motion to vacate the default judgment against it is affirmed where plaintiff's claim for relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) based on the misconduct of its counsel fails as the counsel's actions, even with plaintiff's purported diligence, do not fall within the exceptions to the rule and do not rise to the level of exceptional to warrant such extraordinary relief.

[06/26] Capitol Hill Grp. v. Pillsbury, Winthrop, Shaw, Pittman, LLC
In a legal malpractice action, summary judgment for Defendant law firm is affirmed where previous litigation involving Defendant's fee applications and the malpractice claim arose out of the same nucleus of facts and the identity element of res judicata was satisfied.

More...

Health Law

[07/02] Glaser v. Wound Care Consultants, Inc.
In a qui tam action brought under the False Claims Act, district court judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is affirmed where the district court correctly concluded that the threshold jurisdictional bar of the Act against lawsuits based upon publicly disclosed allegations applied to the suit, as the allegations in the complaint about defendant's billing practices were in fact based on publicly disclosed information and plaintiff failed to show she was an original source of the information used to support the allegations.

[07/02] Milholland v. Sumner Cty. Bd. of Educ.
In an Americans with Disabilities Act action alleging that Plaintiff teacher was transferred between positions based on her arthritis, summary judgment for Defendant is affirmed, where Plaintiff failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Defendant regarded her as disabled.

[07/01] Lafaro v. N.Y. Cardiothoracic Group, PLLC
In an antitrust action, district court's grant of judgment on the pleadings and dismissal on grounds that state action immunity applied to all defendants is vacated and remanded where: 1) defendant Westchester County Health Care Corporation is entitled to the same status as a municipality for purposes of the state action immunity analysis, and the behavior by WCHCC was a foreseeable consequence of the authorizations in WCHCC's enabling statute; and 2) a private party is not exempted from the active supervision prong of the Midcal test simply by virtue of purporting to act pursuant to a contract with a governmental entity that itself would be entitled to state action immunity, and on remand the private defendants-doctors must therefore show that they were actively supervised by WCHCC in order to share in its immunity.

More...