In a recent case before the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Schultz v. Great Plains Trucking, Inc., No. ED111241, 2024 Mo. App. LEXIS 195 (App. E.D. Mar. 26, 2024), the court was divided over the admissibility of evidence regarding a mother’s alleged chronic marijuana use at the time of a motor vehicle crash that claimed her son’s life. Ultimately, the court upheld a verdict from the trial court that exceeded $10 million for Plaintiffs. While the mother was driving, she lost control of her vehicle in rainy conditions, leading to a collision with another car. Her vehicle was subseq ..read more

Insurers regularly encounter claims with multiple claimants with serious injuries. Oftentimes, this results in the insurer receiving multiple policy limit demands that exceed the available policy limits. The most common example of this situation is car accidents with multiple injured persons. The total damages in such situations can quickly exceed t he available policy limits even if the insured has more than the state mandatory minimum of coverage. Multiple policy limit demands place the insurer in a precarious situation. The insurer cannot pay for the damages to one claimant without leaving ..read more

On March 21, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice, joined by fifteen states and the District of Columbia, filed suit against Apple Inc. in the U.S. District Court of New Jersey.  In their  six-count Complaint, the plaintiffs allege that Apple violated antitrust laws under Section 2 of the Sherman Act and different state statutes through its monopolization of the smart phone market.  Specifically, the plaintiffs allege that Apple accomplishes its monopoly by imposing contractual obligations on and withholding critical access points from developers.  Apple also allegedly unde ..read more

A recent case presented an interesting analysis of the Illinois Open Meetings Act (“OMA”) and Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). In International Ass’n of Fire Fighters Local 4646 v. Village of Oak Brook., 2024 IL App (3rd) 220466 in December 2020, the Village of Oak Brook (“Village”) conducted its 2021 budget hearing. During the hearing, the Village Trustees voted to go into closed session to discuss collective negotiating and probable or imminent litigation. After resuming open session, the Village adopted its 2021 budget. The International Association of Fire Fighters Local 4646 (“Union ..read more

The Missouri Supreme Court has clarified the evidence necessary to establish the “known third person” exception to the general rule in Missouri that businesses have no duty to protect invitees from the criminal acts of third person because such activities are rarely foreseeable. In Harner v. Mercy Hospital Joplin, the Supreme Court explained that the limited “known third person” exception only applies when “a person, known to be violent, is present on the premises or an individual is present who has conducted himself so as to indicate danger and sufficient time exists to prevent injury.”  ..read more

Amusement centers and parks are increasingly requiring visitors to sign liability waivers and releases before entering and using their facilities. Often, a patron must sign a new release each time they visit. But what happens if a patron gets injured during one visit and for whatever reason the Release from that visit doesn’t apply? Maybe, the day of that visit, the Release was forgotten and never signed. Maybe a Court declared the Release the day of that visit unenforceable. Would the Release from one of the prior visits apply? This issue recently arose in Karlin v. UATP Springfield, LLC, Cas ..read more

If passed, a proposed bill before the Kansas Senate will make it easier for litigants to admit statements made to translators into evidence. The current version of the bill adds an exception to the rule against hearsay, which reads: (ff)  Language conduit rule. A statement made by a party to a translator without the testimony of the translator unless the judge finds that the translator had a motive to mislead or distort the statement or that the translation was substantially inaccurate. This amendment, which was submitted as Senate Bill 72, is currently working its way through the Senate ..read more

A recently submitted Colorado Ballot Proposal, Initiative 2023-24 #150: Damages Involving Catastrophic Injury or Wrongful Death, requests an amendment to C.R.S. § 13-21-102.7 to remove the noneconomic damages cap for any claim involving catastrophic injury, including wrongful death.  In the ballot proposal, the term “catastrophic injury” is defined as “death, dismemberment, permanent injury to body or mind, or a severe injury that seriously limits activities of normal daily life”. The definition of catastrophic injury set forth in the proposed legislation could be broadly interpreted to i ..read more

Since 2020, Colorado has required insurers issuing “a commercial automobile or personal automobile policy of insurance for delivery in this state shall provide to the insured party a copy of the complete policy of insurance, including any endorsements.” C.R.S § 10-3-1117(1). The mandatory disclosures must include the name of the insurer; the name of each insured party as appears on the declarations page; liability limits; and a copy of the policy. Id. at (2)(a)(I-IV). If an insurer fails to make these disclosures, the cost could become significant. C.R.S § 10-3-1117(3) provides for “damages” o ..read more

Under Illinois common law, there is no cause of action for injuries arising from the sale or gift of alcoholic beverages. Charles v. Seigfried, 165 Ill. 2d 482, 486 (1995). The Illinois legislature enacted an exception to that rule in codifying the Dram Shop Act, which imposes liability on a dram shop (e.g., tavern, night club, restaurant, and even homeowner) that provides alcohol to a patron who, after becoming intoxicated, injures a third party. The Dram Shop Act allows someone injured by an intoxicated person the ability to recover damages from the supplier of the proverbial party. Yesterda ..read more