News
Business
- [07/30] Oil falls to near $78 as global stocks drop
- [07/30] Fortune Brands 2Q profit more than doubles
- [07/30] Renault returns to profit in first half
Employment Practices
- [07/29] Initial jobless claims drop to 457,000
- [07/22] Elevated jobless claims point to weak labor market
- [07/22] Additional jobless benefits hinge on House vote
Personal Injury
- [07/30] Mont. officials await test results in bear attack
- [07/30] Inmate sues man he's convicted of burglarizing
- [07/30] 1,200 homes evacuated in LA Co. as fire spreads
Tort
- [07/30] Mont. officials await test results in bear attack
- [07/30] 1,200 homes evacuated in LA Co. as fire spreads
- [07/30] Inmate sues man he's convicted of burglarizing
Case Summaries
Injury & Tort Law
[06/25]
Crescent Towing & Salvage Co. v. Chios Beauty MV
In an action for damages sustained when defendant's ship collided with plaintiffs' barges and tugboats during Hurricane Katrina, partial judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where the district court did not clearly err in its finding of a predicted "direct hit" on New Orleans by the hurricane, its factual findings based on this finding, and the ultimate finding of negligence to the extent that it relied upon this finding. However, the matter is remanded where the district court needed to enter an order setting the total amount of recovery plaintiffs could recover in rem.
[06/25]
Bagby Elevator Co. v. Schindler Elevator Corp.
In an action for tortious interference with contract, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) under the court's highly deferential standard of review, there was no reversible error in the district court's decision to use the pattern jury instruction; 2) there was sufficient evidence of both malice and gross negligence to support an award of exemplary damages; and 3) there was ample evidence of causation to support the verdict.
[06/25]
Lal v. State of Cal.
In an action against the California Highway Patrol and certain officers for the shooting death of plaintiff's husband, dismissal of the action with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute when her attorney failed to meet deadlines and attend hearings is reversed where an attorney's gross negligence constituted an extraordinary circumstance warranting relief from a judgment dismissing the case for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b).
Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.
