ATTORNEY LIABILITY FOR THE EXPERTS THEY RETAIN
|
|
- Dennis Burns
- 2 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 ATTORNEY LIABILITY FOR THE EXPERTS THEY RETAIN By William E. Vita Gallagher Gosseen Faller & Crowley 1010 Franklin Avenue Garden City, New York (516)
2 ATTORNEY LIABILITY FOR THE EXPERTS THEY RETAIN by William E. Vita 1 You obtain authorization from your client to retain a top-flight expert who will make or break your case. You send the expert deposition transcripts, Interrogatory responses and similar items and then sit back. Your job is done, right? It s now time to relax and watch your expert go to work, isn t it? A recent California Appellate case indicates otherwise. The California court found that a law firm may be held liable when an expert s opinions unravel, leaving the plaintiffs unable to collect a dime on their big-ticket case. It happened in California, could it happen to you? The California Court s decision in Forensis Group, Inc. v. Frantz Townsend & Foldenauer, 130 Cal App. 4 th 14; 29 Cal. Rptr. 3 rd 622; 2005 Cal App LEXIS 929; 2005 Cal Daily Op. Service 4954(4th App. Dist. 2005) is sufficient to grab any practitioner s attention. The facts can be briefly summarized as follows: The law firm of Frantz Townsend & Foldenauer ( the Law Firm ) represented the plaintiffs in a wrongful death action. The plaintiffs husband and father died in a workplace accident when a forklift struck the decedent. The Law Firm retained a professional engineer through an expert witness clearing house. The engineer inspected the forklift in question and reviewed documents provided by the Law Firm, including publications by the Society of Automotive Engineering ( SAE ) regarding the placement of safety alarms on forklifts. When the engineer was deposed, he failed to identify applicable safety standards with respect to the installation of a back-up alarm. The forklift s manufacturer then moved for summary judgment, contending that the lack of a back-up alarm was not a defect and that the forklift met all applicable safety standards. In opposition to the summary judgment motion, the engineer submitted a declaration pointing out that the forklift failed the criteria of a particular SAE safety standard. However, the trial court found that this declaration contradicted the expert s earlier deposition testimony, in which he did not identify any such safety standards. The plaintiffs lost the summary judgment motion against the manufacturer. They then hired new counsel and promptly brought an action against the engineer and the expert witness clearing house firm (together, the experts ), alleging theories of professional negligence, misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty. The plaintiffs claimed that the experts failed to exercise the care and skill that a member of the forensic engineering profession should have, thereby losing the underlying action for the [plaintiffs] and forfeiting their $1.5 million claim. 1 William Vita is a partner in the New York law firm of Gallagher Gosseen Faller & Crowley. He earned his Bachelor s Degree at the University of Notre Dame and the degree of Juris Doctor from Boston College. He engages in a wide range of civil litigation. He is a member of DRI s Commercial Litigation Section and serves as Chair of the F.D.C.C. s Management, Economics & Technology of Practice Section.
3 They also claimed the experts misrepresented the expertise of the [engineer]. Forensis, supra, at 21. The experts, in turn, filed cross-complaints against the Law Firm for indemnity. The engineers argued that: Forensis, supra, at 21. Law Firm had waited too late in the action to consult [the engineers] to obtain a suitable expert, and/or failed to provide [the mechanical engineer] with sufficient information to allow him to provide adequate services and had failed to provide experts with relevant information before and after the hiring. They also argued Law Firm attorneys failed to rehabilitate [the mechanical engineer] at his deposition about the problems regarding the use of the SAE industry standards and had failed to provide the trial court with accurate products liability law in opposing [the forklift manufacturer s] summary judgment motion, regarding admissibility or inadmissibility of industry standards evidence. This claim must have seemed, to the Law Firm, like every attorney s nighmare. They were not only second-guessed about the decisions the firm made during high-stakes litigation, they were also attacked by the very experts the Law Firm had relied upon to lead the charge against the product manufacturer. As any attorney who has ever worked with an expert knows, the preparation of expert reports, deposition testimony and, particularly, trial testimony, is a collaborative effort between the expert(s) and the attorney(s). Decisions on what arguments to make, how to make them, what aspects of a defendant s product to attack and what documents to rely upon when doing so, are only some of the dozens of decisions that attorneys and experts must make in every case, as they work together. The notion that all of these discussions and collaborative decisions, might, one day, pit the collaborators against each other in an ugly display of finger-pointing, is a sobering thought. Both attorneys and experts regularly accept or discard all sorts of theories and opinions and similarly, accept or discard all sorts of documentary evidence to support these opinions. To then go back and second-guess each of these innumerable decisions in the wake of an adverse verdict or court opinion, would chill the relationship between attorney and expert like a February day in Fairbanks. The trial court, perhaps, realizing this, dismissed the expert s cross-complaint against the Law Firm, based on the public policy consideration that conflicts of interest might arise between the Law Firm and its former clients and such a lawsuit would impinge on attorney-client communications. Specifically, the trial court noted that the Law Firm: 3
4 Forensis, supra, at has a duty to do nothing in the trial by [plaintiffs] against the [experts] that would harm [plaintiffs ] case. Yet defeating or diminishing the [plaintiffs ] case is exactly the self-interest the Law Firm would have, knowing that if plaintiff recovers, Law Firm will have to defend the claim that it should indemnify [the experts] from its loss. Therefore, there was a conflict between the... Law Firm and their former [plaintiffs] clients no matter what opinion the attorneys at the Law Firm held concerning the merits of the underlying product defect action. The Appellate Court reversed, noting that: In today's technologically driven litigations [experts] frequently are hired to assist a party in preparing and presenting a legal case. Often they play as great a role in the organization and shaping and evaluation of their client's case as do the lawyers'... As experts, they are subject to liability, if they perform the services negligently... Forensis, supra, at 33, citing Mattco Forge Inc. v. Arthur Young & Co., 52 Cal App. 4 th 820, 834, 60, Cal Rptr2d 780 (1997). to: The Appellate Court went on to note the duty of an attorney who hires an expert witness [m]ake sure that the expert, particularly the inexperienced expert understands the governing legal principles and elements that each party to the litigation must prove in order to prevail... An expert is not a mechanical toy that can simply be wound up and turned loose. Regardless of the expert's skill, it is the lawyer's responsibility to make sure that his or her expertise is presented to the trier of fact in an admissible and persuasive way. Forensis, supra, at 34, citing California Expert Witness Guide (Cont. Ed. Bar.2d ed. 2005), 8.28, page The Court observed that: 4
5 Forensis, supra, at [e]xperts could not independently communicate their knowledge and opinions to the trial court, and had to act through the intermediary of the counsel who retained them... Consequently,... Experts should ordinarily be permitted to sue Law Firm for equitable indemnification of professional malpractice damages for which they have become liable. The appellate court did admit that: Forensis, supra, at p. 35. an otherwise permissible equitable indemnification claim may become improper if certain important public policy principles are violated by it. Specifically, it must be asked in this case whether Law Firm will be able to defend itself against the cross-complaint while: 1) avoiding significant conflicts of interest between itself and the former client... and 2) protecting confidentiality of prior attorney-client communications. The potential for a conflict of interest arises because a law firm dragged into litigation between ex-clients and an expert must necessarily argue either that: 1) the client's case was a strong one, thus driving up the value of the case on which the firm may owe indemnity obligations (an obvious conflict of interest) or 2) the client's case was a weak one (an equally obvious conflict, as the law firm is taking a position adverse to its ex-client's interests). The Forensis court's decision was made much easier because the Law Firm's underlying client settled with the expert defendants, thereby solving the conflict of interest dilemma. Because the client no longer had a financial stake in the case, it did not much matter what position the Law Firm took regarding the strength of the underlying case. Turning to the attorney-client confidentiality policy issues, the Court indicated that the California Code of Evidence exempted issues involving alleged breach of an attorney's duty from the attorney-client privilege protections. Further, the cross-complaint dealt with communication and strategy shared by the Law Firm and the experts, not by the Law Firm and it's clients. So, evaluating the peculiar aspects of the fact pattern, as presented, the Appellate Court reversed the trial court and allowed the experts' claims to proceed against the law firm. The California Appellate Court was not asked to consider whether the doctrine of witness immunity should have barred the client's action against the experts. But this argument has been rejected by other courts throughout the country. In LLMD of Michigan, Inc. et al. v. Jackson- Cross Company, 559 Pa. 297, 306, 740 A.2d 186, 1999 Pa. LEXIS 3206 (1999), the 5
6 Pennsylvania Supreme Court refused to extend the witness immunity doctrine to professional negligence actions which are brought against an expert witness when the allegations of negligence are not premised on the substance of the expert's opinion. California, Missouri, New Jersey and Texas have also held that witness immunity doctrine does not protect an expert witness from liability. Hanson, R., Witness Immunity Under Attack: Disarming Hired Guns, 31 Wake Forest L. Rev. 497 (1996). See, also, Marrogi v. Howard, 805 So.2d 1118; 2002 La. LEXIS 19 (La. 2002) (the Louisiana Supreme Court rejected witness immunity doctrine as protection for an expert witness); Boyes-Bogie v. Horvitz, 14 Mass L. Rep. 208; 2001 Mass Super. LEXIS 582 (Mass Superior Ct. 2001); Pollock v. Manohar Murlidbar Panjabi, et al, 47 Conn. Supp. 179, 781 A2d 518, 2000 Conn Super. LEXIS 1338 (Conn. Superior Ct. 2000); but, see, Darragh v. Superior Court of the State of Arizona, 183 Ariz. 79; 900 P.2d 1215, 1995 Ariz. App. LEXIS 160 (Ariz Ct. of App. 1995); Kahn v. Burman, 673 F.Supp. 210, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (E.D. MI., 1987). The key question is: will the Forensis decision serve as a harbinger of further cases to come? Will clients bring direct actions against their attorneys if the clients are dissatisfied with the experts the attorneys select? One can certainly envision a future in which attorneys will be held increasingly responsible for the success or failure of the experts they choose. Perhaps, such outcomes are appropriate when applied to mass tort plaintiffs' cases in which experts have engaged in junk science or outright fraud. Recent revelations about the fraudulent collusion between plaintiffs attorneys and radiologists in asbestos and silica litigation is one example of egregious and unethical behavior on the part of attorneys and experts. See, Case of the Vanishing X-Rays, Wall Street Journal, August 31, 2005, pg. A8 (Federal Judge Janis Graham Jack uncovered evidence that plaintiffs had filed fraudulent asbestosis and silcosis claims, based on highly suspect readings of x-rays by expert radiologists.) But are we prepared for such outcomes in situations where an attorney retains a reputable expert who, for whatever reason, fails to persuade a trier of facts? In any event, attorneys should consider these questions in the future as they retain and prepare experts for trial. 6
DEMOLISHING EXPERT WITNESSES AND EXPERT WITNESS MALPRACTICE
Keys to Litigation Management Success DEMOLISHING EXPERT WITNESSES AND EXPERT WITNESS MALPRACTICE Marshall Grossman Bingham McCutchen -- 221 -- -- 223 -- -- 224 -- -- 225 -- -- 226 -- -- 227 -- -- 228
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION JOHN FRAZIER HUNT, : DECEMBER TERM, 2004 Plaintiff, : No. 2742 v. : (Commerce Program) NATIONAL
The Standard of Care and Negligence of the Forensic Engineer
The Standard of Care and Negligence of the Forensic Engineer Joshua B. KARDON Structural Engineer Joshua B. Kardon + Company Berkeley, CA, USA jbkse@jbkse.com Joshua B. Kardon received his baccalaureate
An action brought against an attorney alleging negligence in the practice of
5.51 LEGAL MALPRACTICE (Approved 6/79) CHARGE 5.51A Page 1 of 9 A. General Duty Owing An action brought against an attorney alleging negligence in the practice of law is referred to as a malpractice action.
Alternative Burdens May Come With Alternative Causes
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Alternative Burdens May Come With Alternative Causes
MICHAEL D. WAKS LONG BEACH PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY
WHAT IS LEGAL MALPRACTICE IN CALIFORNIA? A client who sustains harm as a direct result of legal malpractice can file a civil lawsuit against the attorney who was responsible for causing that harm. MICHAEL
trial court and Court of Appeals found that the Plaintiff's case was barred by the statute of limitations.
RESULTS Appellate Court upholds decision that malpractice action barred September 2, 2015 The South Carolina Court of Appeals recently upheld a summary judgment obtained by David Overstreet and Mike McCall
It s important to understand the process and react properly when it occurs.
Doctor, You ve Been Sued! It s important to understand the process and react properly when it occurs. By Howard S. Rosenbaum, DPM Malpractice suits are terrifying events for most podiatric physicians.
What to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration
What to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration Russell R. Yurk Jennings, Haug & Cunningham, L.L.P. 2800 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004-1049 (602) 234-7819
29 of 41 DOCUMENTS. SAN DIEGO ASSEMBLERS, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WORK COMP FOR LESS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., Defendant and Respondent.
Page 1 29 of 41 DOCUMENTS SAN DIEGO ASSEMBLERS, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WORK COMP FOR LESS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., Defendant and Respondent. D062406 COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS NO. 13-1006 IN RE ESSEX INSURANCE COMPANY, RELATOR ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS PER CURIAM Rafael Zuniga sued San Diego Tortilla (SDT) for personal injuries and then added
INVESTIGATIONS GONE WILD: Potential Claims By Employees
INTRODUCTION INVESTIGATIONS GONE WILD: Potential Claims By Employees By: Maureen S. Binetti, Esq. Christopher R. Binetti, Paralegal Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. When can the investigation which may
requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.
LEGAL ETHICS OPINION 1814 UNDISCLOSED RECORDING OF THIRD PARTIES IN CRIMINAL MATTERS In this hypothetical, a Criminal Defense Lawyer represents A who is charged with conspiracy to distribute controlled
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT
Filed 10/11/13 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT ED AGUILAR, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. B238853 (Los Angeles County
United States Court of Appeals
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1362 James Joyce, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Armstrong Teasdale,
LEGAL MALPRACTICE AND THE CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY By Peter L. Ostermiller
LEGAL MALPRACTICE AND THE CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY By Peter L. Ostermiller Occasionally, a defendant, while incarcerated and apparently having nothing better to do, will file a Motion under RCr. 11.42,
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT DEPARTMENT NORTHERN DISTRICT FRANK FODERA, SR.
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT DEPARTMENT NORTHERN DISTRICT FRANK FODERA, SR. V. ARBELLA PROTECTION INSURANCE COMPANY NO. 15-ADMS-10012 In the WOBURN DIVISION: Justice:
CASENOTE JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS
CASENOTE JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS FAILURE OF DEFENDANT TO INCLUDE PROPER CODE SECTION IN ANSWER AS TO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IN A CAR ACCIDENT CLAIM WAIVES THE BAR OF THE STATUTE
Expert Testimony In Legal Malpractice Actions
Expert Testimony In Legal Malpractice Actions The potential for expert testimony arises in almost all negligence or malpractice claims against an attorney. Although every state admits expert testimony
POST LITIGATION BAD FAITH THE POTENTIALLY ERODING DEFENSE OF THE INSURER. Bradley J. Vance, Esquire 1
POST LITIGATION BAD FAITH THE POTENTIALLY ERODING DEFENSE OF THE INSURER Bradley J. Vance, Esquire 1 For years Pennsylvania law has defined the bad faith cause of action based upon the terms of 42 Pa.C.S.A.
Reed Armstrong Quarterly
Reed Armstrong Quarterly January 2009 http://www.reedarmstrong.com/default.asp Contributors: William B. Starnes II Tori L. Cox IN THIS ISSUE: Joint and Several Liability The Fault of Settled Tortfeasors
How Do People Settle Disputes? How a Civil Trial Works in California
Article brought to you by the Administrative Office of the California Courts and California Council for the Social Studies in partnership for Civic Education How Do People Settle Disputes? How a Civil
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs Oct. 6, 2008
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs Oct. 6, 2008 RICHARD V. FULLER, ET AL. v. JOHN DENNIE CRABTREE, JR., M.D. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Coffee County No. 32,579
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Thompson v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company et al Doc. 1 1 1 WO William U. Thompson, v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Plaintiff, Property & Casualty Insurance
Chapter 4 Crimes (Review)
Chapter 4 Crimes (Review) On a separate sheet of paper, write down the answer to the following Q s; if you do not know the answer, write down the Q. 1. What is a crime? 2. There are elements of a crime.
FORC QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF INSURANCE LAW AND REGULATION
The plaintiff in Schmidt filed suit against her employer, Personalized Audio Visual, Inc. ("PAV") and PAV s president, Dennis Smith ("Smith"). 684 A.2d at 68. Her Complaint alleged several causes of action
MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION AND DRAFTING CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS
MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION AND DRAFTING CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS ADVANCED PERSONAL INJURY LAW COURSE CLE TEXAS STATE BAR 2013 S AM J OHNSON S COTT, DOUGLASS & MC C ONNICO, L.L.P. A TTORNEYS A T L AW WWW.
THE TRIAL OF A LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASE: SELECTED PRACTICAL ISSUES BY: DAVID C. PISHKO ELLIOT PISHKO MORGAN, P.A. WINSTON-SALEM, NC
THE TRIAL OF A LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASE: SELECTED PRACTICAL ISSUES BY: DAVID C. PISHKO ELLIOT PISHKO MORGAN, P.A. WINSTON-SALEM, NC The trial of a legal malpractice action raises several practical issues
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Filed 6/24/02 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX RONALD J. GRINHAM, Cross-Complainant and Appellant, 2d Civil No. B151600
County products liability suit, and subsequently quashed Plaintiff s appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior Court.
March 1, 2010 I. FIRM NEWS 1. On March 19, 2010 firm member, Thomas F. Gallagher, Esquire gave a presentation in Mount Laurel, New Jersey on relevant statutory immunities for community based youth sports
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Filed 5/28/15 Lopez v. Fishel Co. CA4/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified
Recent Developments in Asbestos Litigation
Recent Developments in Asbestos Litigation Richard O. Faulk Chair, Litigation Department Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP Houston, Dallas, Austin, Mexico City rfaulk@gardere.com Do You Know This Man? Dickie Scruggs:
Employer Must Show Economic Injury to Successfully Invoke Key Employee Exception Under the Family and Medical Leave Act
June 1, 2011 I. EMPLOYMENT LAW Employer Must Show Economic Injury to Successfully Invoke Key Employee Exception Under the Family and Medical Leave Act In Johnson v. Resources for Human Development, Inc.,
Minnesota Professional & Medical Malpractice Law. Professional & Medical Malpractice Law
Minnesota Professional & Medical Malpractice Law Personal Injury Law: Professional & Medical Malpractice o Legal Malpractice Duty Breach Injury Proximate Cause o Medical Malpractice Duty Breach Injury
Cardelli Lanfear P.C.
Michigan Prepared by Cardelli Lanfear P.C. 322 West Lincoln Royal Oak, MI 48067 Tel: 248.850.2179 Fax: 248.544.1191 1. Introduction History of Tort Reform in Michigan Michigan was one of the first states
Amy S. Harris Shareholder
Shareholder Amy Harris joined Macdonald Devin in 1989 and represents clients in state and federal trial and appellate courts, primarily in insurance defense litigation and insurance coverage. She has served
1 of 100 DOCUMENTS. No. B052280. Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division One
Page 1 1 of 100 DOCUMENTS INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Cross-complainant, Cross-defendant and Appellant, v. MONTROSE CHEMICAL CORPORATION OF CALIFORNIA, Cross-defendant, Cross-complainant, and Respondent
Personal Injury Law: Minnesota Medical Malpractice
Personal Injury Law: Minnesota Medical Malpractice Medical Malpractice Terms Statutes of Limitations Minnesota Medical Malpractice Laws Medical malpractice includes many forms of liability producing conduct
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR A136605
Filed 8/28/13 Shade v. Freedhand CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for
Personal Injury Litigation
Personal Injury Litigation The Anatomy of a New York Personal Injury Lawsuit An ebook by Stuart DiMartini, Esq. 1325 Sixth Avenue, 27 th Floor New York, NY 10019 212-5181532 dimartinilaw.com Introduction
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE
NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT
Injury Case Roadmap. The Legal Process For Personal Injury Cases. By Christopher M. Davis, Attorney at Law
Injury Case Roadmap The Legal Process For Personal Injury Cases By Christopher M. Davis, Attorney at Law Davis Law Group, P.S. 2101 Fourth Avenue Suite 630 Seattle, WA 98121 206-727-4000 Davis Law Group,
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Filed 12/18/14 Zulli v. Balfe CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified
ETHICAL RULES AND AGGREGATE SETTLEMENTS
ETHICAL RULES AND AGGREGATE SETTLEMENTS Eliot Jubelirer Schiff Hardin LLP San Francisco Aggregate Settlements Are Common and Necessary To Resolve Mass Consolidated Actions Toxic tort and pharmaceutical
Reflections on Ethical Issues In the Tripartite Relationship
Reflections on Ethical Issues In the Tripartite Relationship [click] By Bruce A. Campbell 1 Introduction In most areas of the practice of law, there are a number of ethical issues that arise on a frequent
ATTORNEY HELP CENTER: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
ATTORNEY HELP CENTER: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE The healthcare industry has exploded over the last thirty years. Combined with an increasing elderly population, thanks to the Baby Boomer generation, the general
Case: 2:04-cv-01110-JLG-NMK Doc #: 33 Filed: 06/13/05 Page: 1 of 7 PAGEID #:
Case: 2:04-cv-01110-JLG-NMK Doc #: 33 Filed: 06/13/05 Page: 1 of 7 PAGEID #: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ALVIN E. WISEMAN, Plaintiff,
The Truth About CPLR Article 16
The DelliCarpini Law Firm Melville Law Center 877.917.9560 225 Old Country Road fax 631.923.1079 Melville, NY 11747 www.dellicarpinilaw.com John M. DelliCarpini Christopher J. DelliCarpini (admitted in
Summary Judgment Standard
McClure v. Banse & Banse, P.C., No. 938-12-08 Rdcv (Cohen, J., Feb. 18, 2010 [The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the
Defense of State Employees: LIABILITY AND LAWSUITS. UNCW Office of General Counsel January 2010
Defense of State Employees: LIABILITY AND LAWSUITS UNCW Office of General Counsel January 2010 COMMON CAUSES OF ACTION (or what could we be sued for) Tort claims Contract claims Discrimination/Harassment
BAD FAITH INSTRUCTIONS Introduction
BAD FAITH INSTRUCTIONS Introduction These instructions are not materially changed from RAJI (CIVIL) 4th. The duty of good faith and fair dealing is implied in every contract. Rawlings v. Apodaca, 151 Ariz.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE B254585
Filed 2/26/15 Vega v. Goradia CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT
Filed 2/11/15 Estate of Thomson CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (El Dorado) ----
Filed 5/16/13; pub. order 6/12/13 (see end of opn.) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (El Dorado) ---- STEVE SCHAEFER, Plaintiff and Respondent, C068229 (Super.
Working with the Physician s Counsel in Defending Off-Label Use Litigation
Working with the Physician s Counsel in Defending Off-Label Use Litigation By Gerald P. Schneeweis Morris Polich & Purdy LLP Working with the Physician s Counsel in Defending Off-Label Use Litigation By
Cooper Hurley Injury Lawyers
Cooper Hurley Injury Lawyers 2014 Granby Street, Suite 200 Norfolk, VA, 23517 (757) 455-0077 (866) 455-6657 (Toll Free) YOUR RIGHTS WHEN YOU ARE INJURED ON THE RAILROAD Cooper Hurley Injury Lawyers 2014
As a current or former non-exempt PPG employee, you may be entitled to receive money from a class action settlement.
NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND HEARING DATE FOR COURT APPROVAL Penaloza, et al., v. PPG Industries, Inc., Case No. BC471369 As a current or former non-exempt PPG employee, you may be entitled
HARVEY KRUSE, P.C. BAD FAITH
HARVEY KRUSE, P.C. BAD FAITH Prepared By: Michael F. Schmidt P25213 HARVEY KRUSE, P.C. 1050 Wilshire Drive, Suite 320 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 649-7800 Fax (248) 649-2316 A. INTRODUCTION Subject to specific
NUZZO & ROBERTS PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY NEWSLETTER
NUZZO & ROBERTS PROFESSONAL LABLTY NEWSLETTER Volume 7 No. 2 April 2010 MEDCAL MALPRACTCE Appellate Court Held Medical Opinion was Sufficient to Comply with the Requirements of C.G.S. 52-190a n Wilcox
WHAT IS IT, HOW TO DEAL WITH IT, AND WHERE IS IT GOING?
WHAT IS IT, HOW TO DEAL WITH IT, AND WHERE IS IT GOING? Moderator: Paul H. Leonard Policyholders view: Andrew M. Weiner Insurers view: Wallace C. Magathan, III First Party Hull Claims Third Party Passenger
2013 IL App (1st) 120546-U. No. 1-12-0546 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2013 IL App (1st) 120546-U Third Division March 13, 2013 No. 1-12-0546 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
260 April 8, 2015 No. 158 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
260 April 8, 2015 No. 158 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON John HARKNESS and Sherri Harkness, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Jack R. PLATTEN, Defendant-Respondent. Washington County Circuit Court
Silencing the Dead: Invoking and Avoiding the Pitfalls of the Dead Man s Act
Illinois Association of Defense Trial Counsel Springfield, Illinois www.iadtc.org 800-232-0169 IDC Quarterly Volume 23, Number 1 (23.1.41) Medical Malpractice By: Dina L. Torrisi and Edna L. McLain HeplerBroom
Exercise Care When Suing for Unpaid Fees. by Anthony Davis 1 & Michael Downey 2
Exercise Care When Suing for Unpaid Fees by Anthony Davis 1 & Michael Downey 2 When a client does not pay, should a law firm file suit to collect unpaid fees? For a long time, many have suggested the answer
S09G0492. FORTNER v. GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY. We granted certiorari in this case, Fortner v. Grange Mutual Ins. Co., 294
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: October 19, 2009 S09G0492. FORTNER v. GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY. NAHMIAS, Justice. We granted certiorari in this case, Fortner v. Grange Mutual Ins. Co.,
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and
CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE FOR PARALEGALS. Many attorneys, paralegals and legal assistants refer to pleadings as all
CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE FOR PARALEGALS III. PREPARATION OF PLEADINGS Many attorneys, paralegals and legal assistants refer to pleadings as all court papers in the case. Technically speaking, the pleadings
FARAH & FARAH RULES OF LAW
RULES OF LAW Injury Case Roadmap: The Legal Process for Personal Injury Cases BY EDDIE E. FARAH & CHARLIE E. FARAH, ATTORNEYS AT LAW ...insurance companies more and more are being run by bean counters,...
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Filed 10/4/13; pub. order 10/28/13 (see end of opn.) COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO ASSEMBLERS, INC., D062406 Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WORK COMP
ALI-ABA Course of Study Asbestos Litigation: Where Is It Going? When Will It End? December 4-5, 2008 San Antonio, Texas
0 ALI-ABA Course of Study Asbestos Litigation: Where Is It Going? When Will It End? December -, 00 San Antonio, Texas Non-Class Aggregate Settlements Submitted by Patrick M. Hanlon University of California
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Filed 8/8/14 Opn filed after rehearing CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION * IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE MICHAEL M. MOJTAHEDI, Plaintiff and
United States Workers Compensation/Indemnification Overview
United States Workers Compensation/Indemnification Overview January 18, 2012 Jill Kirila jill.kirila@squiresanders.com Kevin Hess kevin.hess@squiresanders.com 36 Offices in 17 Countries Workers Compensation
****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the
****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal
STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF WAYNE ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as Bernardini v. Fedor, 2013-Ohio-4633.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF WAYNE ) ROBERT BERNARDINI Appellant C.A. No. 12CA0063 v. ROBERT FEDOR, ESQ.
CASE NO. 1D09-0765. Rhonda B. Boggess of Taylor, Day, Currie, Boyd & Johnson, Jacksonville, for Appellant.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA ATHENA F. GRAINGER, as personal representative of the ESTATE OF SAMUEL GUS FELOS, Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION
Common Myths About Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases 1. By B. Keith Williams
Common Myths About Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases 1 By B. Keith Williams There are several myths about accident cases and the attorneys that handle them. It is important to keep these myths in
OCIPs and Professional Responsibility
OCIPs and Professional Responsibility Rosary A. Hernandez Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP 2525 E. Camelback Road, Suite 450 Phoenix, AZ 85016-4210 (602) 441-1305 rhernandez@wshblaw.com Rosary A. Hernandez,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA : : : : : : : : : :
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA PLAINTIFF, Successor-in-Interest to Plaintiff, vs. DEFENDANT, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S
By: Gerald M. Richardson
MANAGING THE RISKS POSED BY THE THREE PUBLIC POLICY WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CASES RECENTLY DECIDED BY THE MISSOURI SUPREME COURT By: Gerald M. Richardson I. An At Will Employee Can Sue His Employer on a Claim
Key Lawsuit Reforms & Their Impact
Key Lawsuit Reforms & Their Impact December, 2014 Mike Seney, S.V.P Policy Analysis & Strategic Planning (mseney@okstatechamber.com) Fast Facts Twenty-six major lawsuit reforms from 2009 2014: Most of
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. FABIO VERGARA, deceased, by the Administratrix of his Estate, Blanca Cardona,
Professional Practice 544
February 15, 2016 Professional Practice 544 Tort Law and Insurance Michael J. Hanahan Schiff Hardin LLP 233 S. Wacker, Ste. 6600 Chicago, IL 60606 312-258-5701 mhanahan@schiffhardin.com Schiff Hardin LLP.
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Filed 3/21/97 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE STACY RUTTENBERG, Plaintiff and Appellant, B092022 (Super. Ct. No. LC025584)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE
Filed 10/22/99 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE DILLON BOLTON, Plaintiff and Appellant, B123278 (Super. Ct. No. SC037295)
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. 12-408
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. 12-408 JAMES K. MEADOR V. APPELLANT T O T A L C O M P L I A N C E CONSULTANTS, INC., AND BILL MEDLEY APPELLEES Opinion Delivered January 31, 2013 APPEAL FROM THE BENTON COUNTY
An act can be both a crime and a tort. Example reckless driving resulting in an accident
How Do Crimes and Torts Differ? A crime is an offense against society. It is a public wrong. A tort is a private or civil wrong. It is an offense against an individual. If someone commits a tort, the person
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF LAW. LEGAL METHOD-CIVIL PROCEDURE (3 Hours) Day Division Wednesday, December 18, 1991
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF LAW LEGAL METHOD-CIVIL PROCEDURE (3 Hours) Day Division Wednesday, December 18, 1991 Professor Condlin - Section B 9:10 a.m. - 12:10 p.m. No. Signature: Printed Name: INSTRUCTIONS:
Oklahoma Supreme Court Declares Oklahoma s Lawsuit Reform Act of 2009 Unconstitutional
Oklahoma Supreme Court Declares Oklahoma s Lawsuit Reform Act of 2009 Unconstitutional On June 4, 2013, the Oklahoma Supreme Court issued two opinions invalidating as unconstitutional numerous Oklahoma
PURCELL & WARDROPE NEWS Spring 2013
PURCELL & WARDROPE NEWS Spring 2013 TRYING PRODUCT LIABILITY CASES IN ILLINOIS Our office obtained another defense verdict this week. This time it was in a product liability case in Cook County, Illinois,
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: PATRICK J. DIETRICK THOMAS D. COLLIGNON MICHAEL B. KNIGHT Collignon & Dietrick, P.C. Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: JOHN E. PIERCE Plainfield, Indiana
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597
california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and to add Chapter 6 (commencing with
Medical Malpractice Litigation. What to Expect as a Defendant
Medical Malpractice Litigation What to Expect as a Defendant Being named as a defendant in a malpractice suit may be your first exposure to civil litigation. You will probably wish it would just go away.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Filed 8/27/14 Tesser Ruttenberg etc. v. Forever Entertainment CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Filed 1/9/02; pub. order 1/28/02 (see end of opn.) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE ISRAEL P. CHAMBI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. THE REGENTS OF
Indemnity Agreements & California s Crawford Decision: Its Implications and Strategies for Defense
Indemnity Agreements & California s Crawford Decision: Its Implications and Strategies for Defense Prepared for the Construction Law Section Meeting at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the Federation of Defense
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION PRUDENTIAL PROPERTY : MAY TERM, 2004 & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, : No. 0621
(1) It was something fairly and naturally incidental to the employer's business assigned to the employee; and
Employer Liability for Employee Conduct by Lisa Mann 05-01-2000 EMPLOYER LIABILITY FOR EMPLOYEE CONDUCT: When Does An Employer Have to Pay? by Lisa Mann Modrall, Sperling, Roehl, Harris & Sisk, P.A. Employers
2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U. No. 1-14-1985 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U No. 1-14-1985 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation
Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation On January 1, 2012, new rules approved by the Colorado Supreme Court entitled the Civil Access Pilot Project ( CAPP
Asbestos Liability Unlikely For Replacement Parts
Portfolio Media, Inc. 648 Broadway, Suite 200 New York, NY 10012 www.law360.com Phone: +1 212 537 6331 Fax: +1 212 537 6371 customerservice@portfoliomedia.com Asbestos Liability Unlikely For Replacement