Carrier Permitted to Deny Coverage Due to Non-Permissive Use
Tort Talk
by
4d ago
In the case of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Hamilton, No. AD 2020-10 (C.P. Crawf. Co. Feb. 12, 2024 Stevens, J.), the court ruled that State Farm was not required, based upon the facts presented, to provide coverage to a Defendant under the relevant insurance policy for an incident that occurred given that the party at issue was not authorized to be driving the insured’s vehicle on the date of the incident and, therefore, did not qualify as an insured under the liability coverage at issue.  Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK ..read more
Visit website
Summary Judgment Denied in an Alleged Black Ice Slip and Fall Case
Tort Talk
by
4d ago
In the case of Hicks v. DEPG Stroud Associates, No. 0807-CV-2021 (C.P. Monroe Co. April 2, 2024 Williamson, J.), the court denied a Motion for Summary Judgment in a “black ice” slip and fall case. According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff pursued this slip and fall litigation against a shopping center owner and its snow removal contractor. According to the Opinion, it had snowed in the area three (3) days before the incident. The weather on the day of the incident was clear. The record before the court indicated that the snow removal contractor had completed snow removal efforts on the day o ..read more
Visit website
SAVE THE DATE FOR THE LACKAWANNA PRO BONO GOLF TOURNAMENT -- JUNE 10, 2024
Tort Talk
by
4d ago
  ..read more
Visit website
Chief Magistrate Judge Saporito of Federal Middle District Court Reviews Assumption of Risk Doctrine
Tort Talk
by
1w ago
In the case of Hazen v. Woodloch Pines Resort, No. 3:21-CV-00174 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 16, 2024 Saporito, C.M.J.) Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr., of the Federal Middle District Court of Pennsylvania denied a Motion for Summary Judgment by a Defendant resort in a fall down case. According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff was engaged in a corporate team building activity on an outdoor low ropes challenge course. During one of the challenges, the Plaintiff fell, along with other members of her team, to the ground below.  The Plaintiff allegedly suffered a significant ankle injury, i ..read more
Visit website
Certificate of Merit Requirements Also Apply in Federal Court
Tort Talk
by
1w ago
In the case of Rightmyer v. Philly Pregnancy Center, P.C., No. 23-1925 (E.D. Pa. March 1, 2024 Quinones Alejandro, J.), the court granted a Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss after finding that the Certificate of Merit requirements for medical malpractice claims in Pennsylvania also apply in federal court. In this case, the court ruled that a nurse is not qualified to execute a required Pennsylvania Certificate of Merit in a medical malpractice action against a medical doctor. The court additionally failed to plead a claim for negligence infliction of emotional distress in this case. Anyone wi ..read more
Visit website
Court Upholds Arbitration Agreement in a Nursing Home Malpractice Case
Tort Talk
by
1w ago
In the case of Dougherty v. Scranton Health Investors, LLC, No. 2014-CV-5245 (C.P. Lacka. Co. Feb. 1, 2024 Nealon, J.), Judge Terrence R. Nealon of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas addressed Preliminary Objections filed by the owner and operator of a skilled nursing home facility seeking to compel the Plaintiff to submit this litigation to binding Arbitration pursuant to an Arbitration Agreement. According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff commenced this survival action against the facility where her mother allegedly fell and suffered a fractured hip. In the lawsuit, the Plaintiff so ..read more
Visit website
Defendant's Post-Verdict Request for Damages Denied by Court on Basis Of Defense Counsels' Conduct During Trial
Tort Talk
by
2w ago
In the case of McManus v. Walgreens Co., Inc., No. 2:21-CV-02285-CFK (E.D. Pa. March 11, 2024 Kenney, J.), Judge Chad Kenney of the Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania denied a Defendant’s post-verdict bill of cost, thereby precluding the Defendants from securing more than $130,000.00 in legal fees. The court rejected the motion after finding that “evasive” conduct by defense counsel, including allegations that defense counsel misled the court during the course of trial, supported the court’s decision. According to the Opinion, during the trial the defense expert testified about his fin ..read more
Visit website
Trial Court Rules That Plaintiff Must Cooperate and Answer IME Doctor's Questions That Are Germane
Tort Talk
by
2w ago
In the Monroe County case of Nelson v. Wilkins, No. 1381-CV-2022 (C.P. Monroe Co. Jan. 26, 2024 C. Daniel Higgins, Jr., J.), the court granted a Defendant’s Motion to Compel a Plaintiff to provide information to the IME doctor during an independent medical examination of a Plaintiff in a personal injury case arising out of a motor vehicle accident. According to the decision, the Plaintiff had appeared for an examination but refused to answer the IME doctor’s questions, asserting that the questions were allegedly outside the scope of Pa. R.C.P. 4010 about the occurrence of the accident that ..read more
Visit website
Where Defense Medical Expert Does Not Concede Injury, Causation Remains In Dispute
Tort Talk
by
2w ago
In the case of Dang v. Geico Secure Ins. Co., No. 23-2311 (E.D. Pa. March 14, 2024 Hey, Mag.J.), the court denied a Motion In Limine in an uninsured motorist benefits case.  The Plaintiff sought a ruling from the Court that the subject accident was a factual cause of the Plaintiff's alleged injuries based upon the expert reports submitted by the parties.  In so ruling, the court held that, where both parties’ experts agree that the Plaintiff has suffered some form of an injury from the Defendant’s conduct, a jury cannot find a total lack of causation. However, this rule does not ap ..read more
Visit website
Case Transferred Under Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens
Tort Talk
by
2w ago
In the case of Leone v. Gusick, No. 2023-CV-37 (C.P. Lacka. Co. March 1, 2024 Nealon, J.). The court granted certain defendants motion to transfer a case under the doctrine known as forum non conveniens in a medical malpractice action that was filed in Lackawanna County and which was transferred to Lycoming County by virtue of this decision. According to the Opinion, the Lycoming County plaintiffs in this case filed this medical malpractice action against Lycoming County and Centre County doctors and their Lycoming County and Montour County employers based upon medical treatment that was pro ..read more
Visit website

Follow Tort Talk on FeedSpot

Continue with Google
Continue with Apple
OR