1 Page 1 of 7 No Room For Liability: A Hotel's Exposure to Costly Negligent Security Claims is Controllable. Security Management, June, 1997, John E. Osborn and Sal DePasquale. Several years ago, Richard Matt and his wife were in the parking lot of an Atlanta hotel, about to head to the airport for their honeymoon. While he was removing luggage from the trunk of his car, Matt was shot by robbers. A nearby security officer saw the crime take place and called for police assistance. But the damage was done. Matt sued the hotel for negligent security, arguing that the crime was foreseeable. He produced evidence that eighty-one crimes had been committed in the hotel parking lot in the previous three years, including a purse snatching and a forcible robbery. Three nearby hotels also had suffered more than 400 crimes in their parking lots in the same period, including armed robberies, rapes, and kidnappings. Moreover, the hotel security officer had complained to management about feeling unsafe, and had asked to be supplied with a weapon, bulletproof vest and phone. At trial, however, the court granted the hotel's motion for summary judgment, concluding that the crime was caused by the unforeseeable action of a third party--there had not been a prior crime committed on the premises in a similar manner and under like circumstances. (Summary judgment is a request for the judge to make a ruling based on the facts and law, most often prior to trial.) The decision was appealed. The appeals court (with three dissenting votes) reversed the lower court's decision, finding that the trial court had imposed too narrow a definition of foreseeability (Mat v. Days Inn of America, 1994). The ruling indicated that the high crime rate in and around the hotel should have been enough to warrant extra security. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the appeals court ruling and remanded the case for trial. According to a defense attorney for the Atlanta hotel, the parties ended up settling the lawsuit for an estimated $90,000. Foreseeability is just one of many issues a hotel must consider when defending a negligent security case. While a hotel security professional's primary goal is to help the business protect staff and patrons, an increasingly important goal is to ensure that the security program will shield the company against significant damage awards in the unfortunate cases where guests are injured. Understanding the elements of a legal claim is key, as is a good legal strategy. The best defense is a good offense--a preemptive liability audit to guide the hotel in establishing a sound security program. Elements of a claim. Inadequate security cases hinge on four major elements: whether the owner owed a duty to provide a safe environment to the injured party, whether the owner breached that duty, whether the breach constituted the "proximate cause" of the injury, and whether the plaintiff suffered actual injury or damage. Foreseeability is the major factor by which the first three elements are evaluated. Duty. It must first be established that the hotel owner had a duty to provide a safe environment for the victim.
2 Page 2 of 7 Dating back to the 19th century, innkeepers have been held to a high standard of care for their guests, who are often hundreds of miles from home. Innkeepers have a special duty to use ordinary care to protect guests from unreasonable risk of harm where the owner is aware or should reasonably be aware of that risk. For example, in Cyzio v. Righa International U.S.A. Inc. (New York Supreme Court, 1997), the trial court denied the hotel's motion for summary judgment. It distinguished a hotel's duty from the lesser duty owed by a landlord to its residential tenants. In another case, a man was assaulted in a private outdoor area on the way to his room (Van Blargan v. Williams Hospitality Corp., U.S. District Court, Puerto Rico, 1991). He sued and recovered $500,000. In its decision, the court distinguished public areas, such as lobbies, from private areas, such as room corridors, stating that enhanced security was necessary in private places. The court likened the attack site to a private passageway since it was enclosed by trees, foliage, and a pool. Thus, the court found, the hotel had a duty to provide heightened security there. Breach. Before a company can be held liable for an injury, the property owner must have violated the duty owed to the victim. In a basic case involving a criminal attack on a guest, a breach occurs when the hotel fails to act even when it knows an attack is taking place, such as in Sauer v. St. James Club & Hotel (Los Angeles Superior Court, 1994). In that case, funk artist Rick James held captive and beat a woman in his hotel room over a twelve-hour period. At one point, a room service waiter came to the room, and the victim begged him to help her. The waiter informed security officers, but no action was taken. Not surprisingly, the jury found the hotel liable. But most cases are not that clear-cut. Courts seek to determine whether a breach of duty occurred by examining whether the hotel had adequate safeguards in place to prevent reasonably foreseeable dangers. Courts may define "reasonably foreseeable" quite differently than a layman would. In Chapman v. ESJ Towers, for example, a hotel guest standing at the front desk was shot in the leg by a felon fleeing in a car (U.S. District Court, Puerto Rico, 1992). The victim sued the hotel, and the trial court dismissed the case. The appeals court reversed, finding, among other things, that the only one security guard was on duty working a twelve-hour shift without a break and watching ten to fifteen CCTV monitors simultaneously. The court also found that cars could get out of the hotel's lot without going through an access control system. Some states, such as New York and Ohio, have laws that limit a hotel's liability for theft of personal property. These laws, known as limited-liability statutes, protect innkeepers who provide a safe or safe deposit box for their guests, provide adequate notice of these safes, and state clearly the ramifications of not placing personal articles in them. Causation. The property owner's breach of duty must be the proximate cause of the victim's damages. Inadequate security alone is not enough to warrant a ruling in favor of the victim. There may have been an unpreventable intervening factor, for example, that caused the injury. To determine whether proximate cause exists, courts frequently look at whether the crime was foreseeable. What is foreseeable at one property, however, is not necessarily foreseeable at another. An important test of foreseeability is whether previous crimes have occurred in or around the hotel, putting the hotel on notice of security problem. But how recent and similar to the incident at hand must the prior crimes be? There is no magic formula for making that determination; courts generally consider either "the totality of the circumstances" or prior similar incidents. In some states, courts have held that "reasonably foreseeable" means that the exact same crime occurred on the property relatively recently, perhaps within the year. Other courts have ruled that "reasonably foreseeable" equates to similar events that took place in or near the property--no matter how recently.
3 Page 3 of 7 In Meyers v. Ramada Hotel Operating Co. (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. 1987), a man forced his way into the hotel room of Cathleen Meyers and raped her. Meyers sued the hotel but the trial court granted the hotel's motion for summary judgment. In reversing that finding and determining the act foreseeable, the court noted the relevance of a number of incidents involving threats to guest safely in the seventeen months before the attack, such as a man resisting arrest with force and the arrest of a drug dealer carrying a loaded.38 revolver. The court also found it relevant that the hotel's night manager had been robbed fourteen years before the attack on Meyers. In distinguishing the Meyers case from another case in which a post office was found not liable for a rape in its lobby, the court pointed out that personal attacks are more likely in hotel rooms and hotel bars, which encourage alcohol consumption and congregation of strangers in the early morning. (The case also shows that courts deciding hotel liability cases will look to precedent and practices involving other businesses. Counsel must be familiar with premises liability law in different environments.) The case laid out other factors relevant to foreseeability, including: The hotel's compliance with industry standards in protecting its premises. The presence of suspicious people around the premises. Peculiar security problems of the hotel, such as having stairwells available to the public and not restricted to emergency use. Other courts have considered different factors, including the design of the facility, the nature of the hotel and crimes rates and types of crimes in other hotels. Foreseeablity can also be suggested in an employee's comment. In Penchas v. Hilton Hotels (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 1993), the appeals court upheld the denial of the defendant's motion for summary judgment. In that case, a woman had jewels stolen by scam artists as she was getting into a cab in the hotel's driveway. In denying the motion, the lower court noted that the hotel porter had become suspicious during the incident, stating "[T]hey do this when they rob people." That raised enough of a factual question, according to both courts, to raise the issue of foreseeability and put the case in front of a jury where, this year, a verdict for the defendant was reached. Injury. The final element of a premises liability claim is injury. The victim must have suffered harm, such as injury or loss of property, as a result of the hotel's negligence. Juries. Although the elements of hotel premises security claims are fairly consistent nationwide, courts and juries across the country--and even within the same jurisdiction--have interpreted these elements differently, leading to disparate results in similar fact patterns. Some courts have favored the victims, while others have leaned toward protecting the property owner. For example, in our experience, rural juries in New York State tend to be conservative and protective of large businesses, while plaintiffs more often receive multimilliondollar awards from inner city juries, especially in the Bronx, Brooklyn, and other places where jurors may feel disenfranchised and angry at the system. Legal strategy. Defense counsel for a hotel has many tactical decisions to make in defending a premises liability case. Once the victim's attorney serves a complaint, the hotel must choose between moving to dismiss the case--typically on technical grounds such as the assertion that the plaintiff has not stated sufficient facts on which to base a claim--or serving an answer. Answering a complaint does not rule out later moving for summary judgment after an investigation into the facts of the case. The hotel owner can also choose to settle the case at any time--even before serving an answer-
4 Page 4 of 7 -based on factors such as the likely cost of its own legal expenses and whether a delaying strategy will force the plaintiff to accept less. Discovery. If the case is not settled during the initial stages, discovery will take place. Discovery entails the exchange of documents and information related to the case, pretrial depositions of witnesses, and written interrogatories or demands for bills of particulars--an itemized list of the plaintiff's claims. During discovery, the hotel should at a minimum ask for the following types of information: Documentation of the nature of the injury sustained by the victim. Documentation detailing the amount and composition of damages sustained by the victim, such as lost earnings, medical bills, and pain and suffering. The victim's medical records to determine whether he or she had prior injuries that are now being claimed as new. The victim's criminal record and litigation in which the victim has been involved to determine, among other things, whether he or she has filed lawsuits frivolously or tied to extort money from businesses. In turn, the victim's attorney will ask for items as: The security log books maintained by the property owner. Periodic security reports prepared by officers and management. Neighborhood crime statistics, which may show that the same crimes have been committed in the past. A list of prior incidents and accidents at the hotel. Information, such as internal memos, showing that the property owner foresaw or could have reasonably foreseen the incident. Evidence that the property owner did not take precautions, such as memos about a particular security problem that was never addressed. An inventory of security equipment on the premises plus proposals for security purchases and upgrades. Information, such as blueprints and technical drawings, showing the design of the premises to enable a review as to whether the design led to an unsafe situation. In some cases, a deposition of the architect who designed the premises may be requested. The innkeeper should have in order all material that may be requested. Documents showing that the innkeeper knew of the risk but failed to act are tantamount to a smoking gun. If, however, security has been properly managed, these documents will present a convincing picture that management was aware of all risks (or took reasonable steps to discover all risks) and took adequate measures to prevent them. Summary judgment. If the case is not settled early on, it will often be settled after the hotel loses a motion for summary judgment. A motion for summary judgment puts before the court all of the basic facts of the case not in dispute, often including statements of witnesses taken under oath (which may have been recorded at a pretrial deposition). The motion for summary judgment is granted to the hotel if it shows that the victim has
5 Page 5 of 7 failed to establish a valid claim based on the undisputed facts presented (viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff) or that the hotelier has an affirmative defense that precludes recovery. Moving for summary judgment early on, however, is risky for the hotel because many judges are reluctant to throw out cases so quickly. Plaintiffs win most of these motions and, with a dispositive ruling by the judge in hand, become emboldened to press their case further. The plaintiff's settlement demand will often skyrocket. By contrast, if the defense saves such a motion until the eve of trial, it may get an advantage because the plaintiff will have no indication of what the judge thinks about the case and the defense may then be able to negotiate a lower settlement. Trial. In developing strategy for the victim, plaintiff's counsel will focus the jury's attention on the victim's suffering and the perceived lack of security. Counsel will also highlight countermeasures that could have been taken to prevent the incident. The plaintiff's goal is to convince the jury that appropriate countermeasures could have been reasonably implemented and that the failure to do so constitutes negligence. To win over the jury, the plaintiff's counsel often seeks to show indifference, disregard, or callousness on the part of the owner. For their part, defense attorneys need to demonstrate that their client diligently fulfilled the duty of care. The defense must be able to demonstrate to the jury that security was taken seriously and that a sophisticated analysis was conducted to determine which security measures to take. Counsel must then demonstrate that the security measures mapped out were actually implemented. Defense counsel would also emphasize to the jury that the hotel cannot be kept crime-free and that they should consider only whether management took adequate precautions to guard against harm to potential victims. Defense counsel will most often benefit by educating the judge or jury as to the broad array of complicated and sometimes conflicting security issues faced by the hotel, illustrating that the incident was either not reasonably foreseeable or not reasonably preventable. The defense must demonstrate that the property owner was diligent, and that the event was extraordinary-- occurring despite a determined effort at providing security. For example, in Franklin v. Dupuis & Associates, a truck driver was shot in a parking lot as he was preparing to enter his motel room. The driver sued, and the jury found for the motel. Upholding the verdict, the appeals court noted that the motel had met its duty to provide reasonable care. It pointed out that the motel had only been robbed twice before, so no extraordinary security measures were necessary. Moreover, the appeals court observed, the motel had only one entrance, and the facility was surrounded by an eight-foot-high fence topped with barbed wire. Liability audit. Hotels should not wait until they are sued before they consider how well their security program would withstand close scrutiny. They should preemptively conduct a legal liability audit to develop a full understanding of risks on the property. Essentially, this is a security survey conducted with an eye toward how the jury would see each element under review. The propose is simple: Is security adequate? Does security work? Would the hotel be comfortable defending each practice in court? If the audit yields a "no" answer to any of these questions, immediate changes should be made. Management can hire outside counsel to act as the audit director and team leader. It should be noted that confidential communications made to the attorney by the client will be protected by the attorney-client privilege. Further, the "work product" rule may protect from disclosure documents and information prepared in anticipation of litigation that contain mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of the attorney. Documentation may include an attorney's legal opinion that a given security measure or program is
6 Page 6 of 7 adequate or inadequate. Because of the possibility that the hotel will end up in court, the outside counsel should have litigation experience. Depending on the level of in-house expertise, it may be important to include on the audit team a multidisciplinary security consultant who can assess vulnerabilities and quickly determine where specific security measures can be implemented. If a renovation or Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance program will be implemented, an architect should also serve as part of the team. The team should develop a detailed scope of the audit before it begins. In this process, team members should discuss goals in conducting the audit as if they were articulating a business plan. Team members should brainstorm about all the places and ways a criminal might operate on the property. Topics of special concern might include access to rest rooms, stairwells, corridors, and hotel safes. The team should make sure that preliminary information provided by the hotel owner is accurate by asking hotel staff detailed questions. For example, the team should make sure it gets an exhaustive list of all prior security incidents, including any unrecorded incidents. Team members should ensure that they have the most recent blueprint of the hotel and that they have interviewed staff members who work at different hours. They should also ensure that the audit is supported by senior management before it is undertaken. The full premises should be assessed, including adjacent uses and risks. For instance, a nightclub on an upper floor may lead to drunk guests roaming the hotel, or an all-night convenience store next door may lead to a stream of pedestrians seeking rest rooms. If the audit reveals problems, the team should prepare a realistic plan to remedy each one. For example, if stairways offer hiding places for thieves, a hotel might better illuminate the area, install CCTV cameras, have officers patrol there, or restrict stairs to emergency use only. The team should then set up a consistent and organized record-keeping system to document security problems and efforts, and make sure it is followed assiduously. A policy of candor should be developed. Legal liability often derives not from a security problem, but from the lengths to which the property owner has gone to conceal the problems from hotel guests. Candor, in the form of signs and oral warnings, allows occupants to better protect themselves. A hotel's exposure to costly premises liability cases is controllable. By understanding why judges and juries hold hotels liable for guests injuries and using that knowledge to develop an effective and legally defensible security program, hotel management can ensure that they, as well as their guests, get a good night's sleep. An Ounce of Prevention Hotel security professionals should make sure that management knows the high cost of security. Although varying statistics rank the cost differently, all agree that litigation strains corporate coffers. The cost of defending against negligent security cases may well exceed the cost of implementing security measures. A new study by Liability Consultants, Inc., of Sudbury, Massachusetts, shows that there were thirty-five reported negligent security cases involving hotels--of 549 total--between 1993 and The number places hotels eighth on the list of targets. The picture is even worse according to A Complete Guide to Premises Security Litigation, a 1995 American Bar Association study by Alan Kaminsky. Kaminsky finds that hotels are the second biggest business target on premises liability suits (accounting for 22 percent), trailing only residential property owners (36 percent). By
7 Page 7 of 7 contrast, retail stores (9 percent), restaurants and bars (7 percent), offices (5 percent), hospitals (5 percent) and colleges (3 percent) face relatively few suits. The average settlement in a hotel premises liability case is a whopping $1.2 million. The ABA study estimates total pretrial expenses for all commercial property owners as ranging between $18,000 and $30,000 and expenses during trial running to at least $35,000. These figures appear to be conservative, and hotel owners are advised to anticipate expenses that well exceed these numbers.
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.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, CASE NUMBER: JUDGE: vs. Defendant. / COMPLAINT COMES NOW, Plaintiff,, and hereby sues
Unintentional Torts - Definitions Negligence The failure to exercise the degree of care that a reasonable person would exercise that results in the proximate cause of actual harm to an innocent person.
PRODUCT LIABILITY Product Liability Litigation The Effect of Product Safety Regulatory Compliance By Kenneth Ross Product liability litigation and product safety regulatory activities in the U.S. and elsewhere
PBI Electronic Publication # EP-2820 Analysis of Premises Liability for the Criminal Acts of Third Parties Kenneth M. Dubrow, Esq. The Chartwell Law Offices, LLP Philadelphia A chapter from Tort Law Update
Premises Liability for Third Party Crime (Full Article) Owners and managers of commercial property (including leased residential properties) can be held liable under civil negligence claims for harm to
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,...
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-CA-00315-SCT CALLOP HAMPTON v. CHARLES BLACKMON AND DEXTER BOOTH DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/23/2013 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. WINSTON L. KIDD TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS: WILLIAM
WHAT HAPPENS IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE From Negotiating With Insurance Companies To Trial By Michael A. Schafer, Attorney at Law 440 South Seventh Street, Ste. 200 Louisville, Kentucky 40203 (502) 584-9511
THE THREAT OF BAD FAITH LITIGATION ETHICAL HANDLING OF CLAIMS AND GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT PRACTICES By Craig R. White SKEDSVOLD & WHITE, LLC. 1050 Crown Pointe Parkway Suite 710 Atlanta, Georgia 30338 (770)
What Happens Next? The Legal Process Roadmap for Personal Injury Cases By Ross A. Jurewitz Injury Accident Attorney, Jurewitz Law Group Jurewitz Law Group 600 B Street Suite 1550 San Diego, CA 92101 Tel:
Case 1:07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB Document 51 Filed 08/21/2008 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB ERNA GANSER, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT
Canadian Law 12 Negligence and Other Torts What is Negligence? Someone who commits a careless act that creates harm to another person is negligent. Over the past several years, negligence has become the
LAW OFFICE OF JILLIAN T. WEISS, P.C. P.O. BOX 642 TUXEDO PARK, NEW YORK 10987 (845) 709-3237 Fax: (845) 915-3283 INFORMATION ABOUT CLIENT REPRESENTATION Thank you for considering retaining the Law Office
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
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
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
SECOND DIVISION May 31, 2011 No. 1-10-0602 Notice: This order was filed under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under
Table of Contents 1. What should I do when the other driver s insurance company contacts me?... 1 2. Who should be paying my medical bills from a car accident injury?... 2 3. What should I do after the
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
NEGLIGENCE (Heavily Tested) (Write On the Bar): In order for Plaintiff to recover in Negligence, she or he must plead and prove: DUTY, BREACH OF DUTY, ACTUAL CAUSATION, PROXIMATE CAUSATION, AND DAMAGES.
9-18-01 SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 2001-CC-0175 CLECO CORPORATION Versus LEONARD JOHNSON AND LEGION INDEMNITY COMPANY ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT, PARISH OF ST. TAMMANY
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).
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
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA CINDY L. SOREL, n/k/a CINDY L. EBNER, CASE NO. 1D09-2525 Appellant, v. TROY CHARLES KOONCE and COMCAST OF GREATER FLORIDA/GEORGIA, INC.,
LEGAL ISSUES Why should I learn about legal issues? School administrators are typically the only personnel to receive training in classroom liability issues, yet teachers have the most responsibility for
Illinois Supreme Court Requires Plaintiff to Apportion Settlements Among Successive Tortfeasors By: Joseph B. Carini III & Catherine H. Reiter Cole, Grasso, Fencl & Skinner, Ltd. Illinois Courts have long
Car, Truck or Motorcycle Damage in Georgia How to Start Your Car, Truck or Motorcycle Damage Claim; Your Property Damage Claim We recommend consulting with an attorney before making contact with any insurance
NEGLIGENCE: ELEMENT I: DUTY CHAPTER 13 General Rule on Duty What is a duty? A duty is an obligation or a requirement to conform to a standard of conduct prescribed by law. Consider the following questions.
Laying Down the Law: A Review of Trends in Liability Lawsuits By Teresa Anderson A new premises security liability study to be released this month examines the cost of lawsuits, who is winning, and what
MOLESTATION LIABILITY EXAMINES SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT & FORESEEABILITY James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 1997 James C. Kozlowski In determining agency liability for sexual molestation by its employees, an employer
If you have been sued as a defendant in a civil case...keep reading. Court procedures can be complex. This brochure was developed to help Ohioans who are considering representing themselves in court. It
Present: Hassell, C.J., Keenan, Koontz, Kinser, Lemons, and Millette, JJ., and Carrico, S.J. WILLIAM P. RASCHER OPINION BY v. Record No. 090193 JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. February 25, 2010 CATHLEEN
Why a Personal Injury Practice Is Different I wrote in the first two editions of this book that starting a personal injury practice is not for the fainthearted. Sadly, that fact is even truer today than
SAFETY REVIEW NOT SPECIFIED IN CONTRACT James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 2008 James C. Kozlowski In contracting for personal services, an architect's duty depends on the particular agreement entered into
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANTS: MICHAEL A. MINGLIN Miller & Minglin, P.C. Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: JAMES W. ROEHRDANZ ERIC D. JOHNSON Kightlinger & Gray, LLP Indianapolis,
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
New Win November 2014: Client is a retiree who loaned $21,000 to a pool contractor and separately hired him for $90,000 to build a home pool. When the money was not repaid and the pool contained two defects,
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
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 firstname.lastname@example.org Schiff Hardin LLP.
NOT ACTUAL PROTECTION: ACTUAL INNOCENCE STANDARD FOR CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS IN CALIFORNIA DOES NOT ELIMINATE ACTUAL LAWSUITS AND ACTUAL PAYMENTS By Celeste King, JD and Barrett Breitung, JD* In 1998
rightlawyers.com RIGHT Lawyers Right Lawyers has successfully represented numerous clients in the areas of car accidents, work injuries, and slip and falls. The goal of this guide is to provide you answers
ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION GUIDELINES WITH LITIGATION IN MIND Introduction The purpose of this paper is to alert the reader to concepts used in the defense of construction related lawsuits and to suggest how
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
Page 1 of 6 Anatomy of a Hotel Breach Written by Sandy B. Garfinkel Monday, 09 June 2014 15:22 Like 0 Tweet 0 0 Data breach incidents have dominated the news in 2014, and they are only becoming more frequent
Employment Practices Liability Insurance Claims Scenarios Type of Claim: Federal Lawsuit Cause of Action: Disability, Discrimination/Wrongful Failure to Hire Type of Insured: Marketing Firm Facts: An applicant
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
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION-CIVIL FIRST FINANCIAL INSURANCE : June Term 2009 COMPANY, : Plaintiff, : No. 2231 v. : LIBERTY
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 email@example.com Alternative Burdens May Come With Alternative Causes
STATE OF OREGON TRANSPORTATION COMPENDIUM OF LAW Rodney L. Umberger, Jr. Marc M. Carlton Williams Kastner 888 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 600 Portland, OR 97204 Phone: (503) 228 7967 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Negligence: Element III: Proximate Cause Chapter 15 Introduction Proximate Cause. 1) the causation question (cause in fact): Did the defendant cause the plaintiff s injury? 2) The policy question ( a cut-off
DESIGN AGAINST SECURITY LAWSUITS As presented at the American Society of Industrial Security Convention, 1994 By Randall Atlas Ph.D., AIA Atlas Safety & Security Design, Inc. Miami, Florida Criminologists
NEW JERSEY JUDICIARY SMALL CLAIMS Superior Court of New Jersey Law Division Special Civil Part Small Claims Section Small Claims page 1 The small claims section is a court in which you can sue a person
Case 0:05-cv-02409-DSD-RLE Document 51 Filed 03/16/2006 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil No. 05-2409(DSD/RLE) Kristine Forbes (Lamke) and Morgan Koop, Plaintiffs, v.
NOTICE Decision filed 10/15/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227
Agents E&O Standard of Care Project Survey Maryland To gain a deeper understanding of the differing agent duties and standard of care by state, the Big I Professional Liability Program and Swiss Re Corporate
2014 IL App (1st) 123454-U No. 1-12-3454 February 11, 2014 Modified Upon Rehearing April 30, 2014 THIRD DIVISION NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent
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,
NOTICE Decision filed 02/09/11. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. NO. 5-09-0460 IN THE APPELLATE COURT
Missouri Small Claims Court Handbook The Missouri Bar Young Lawyers' Section TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION TO THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT...1 Page II. THINGS TO CONSIDER BEFORE BRINGING A CLAIM...1 A. WHO
As amended by P.L.79-2007. INDIANA FALSE CLAIMS AND WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT IC 5-11-5.5 Chapter 5.5. False Claims and Whistleblower Protection IC 5-11-5.5-1 Definitions Sec. 1. The following definitions
What Trustees Should Know About Florida s New Attorneys Fee Statute By David P. Hathaway and David J. Akins Introduction More and more lawsuits are filed in Florida alleging that the trustee of a trust
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 0 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 17th day of October, 200, are as follows: PER CURIAM: 2005-C -249 CHARLES ALBERT AND
Insurance Coverage Issues for Products Manufactured by Foreign Companies James S. Carter August 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION...1 II. COVERAGE PROVISIONS...1 A. Duty to Defend...1 B. Duty
SMALL CLAIMS COURT CHECKLIST for Plaintiff 1. Write a Demand Letter to the defendant (person who injured you/your property) a. Tell the defendant why you think they owe you money, and how much money is
What the Jury Hears in Products Liability Litigation The View From Both Sides and the Middle Theresa Zagnoli, Communications Expert and Jury Consultant Susan T. Dwyer, Defense Lawyer Jeffrey A. Lichtman,
Local Rule 1301 Scope. Compulsory Arbitration Local Rule 1301 Scope. (1) The following civil actions shall first be submitted to and heard by a Board of Arbitrators: (a) (b) (c) (d) Civil actions, proceedings
SMALL CLAIMS COURT What Is Small Claims Court? Nebraska law requires that every county court in the state have a division known as Small Claims Court (Nebraska Revised Statute 25-2801). Small Claims Court
I. Overview 6.1 6 First-Party Litigation II. Initial Client Meeting A. In General 6.2 B. Identifying the Proper Insurer 6.3 C. Determining the Types of Benefits Recoverable 1. In General 6.4 2. Work Loss
5 FUNDAMENTALS OF UNCOMPROMISING ADVOCACY By Anthony Castelli Auto Accident and Personal Injury Attorney INTRODUCTION If you ve been seriously harmed in a car accident, getting a fair settlement can be
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
Injured on the Job Your Rights under FELA Quick Facts: What To Do If Injured 1. Consult your own doctor for treatment. Give your doctor a complete history of how your injury happened. Make sure that the
9 THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Continuing Legal Education Third Party Litigation Funding: Pros, Cons, and How It Works November 1, 2012 Telephone Seminar/Audio Webcast Alternative Litigation Funding Conference
2016 IL App (1st) 150810-U Nos. 1-15-0810, 1-15-0942 cons. Fourth Division June 30, 2016 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in
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
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 11-1385 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. ROBERT J. VENTI, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT
Torts Copyright July, 2006 State Bar of California After paying for his gasoline at Delta Gas, Paul decided to buy two 75-cent candy bars. The Delta Gas store clerk, Clerk, was talking on the telephone,
CALIFORNIA FALSE CLAIMS ACT GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 12650-12656 12650. (a) This article shall be known and may be cited as the False Claims Act. (b) For purposes of this article: (1) "Claim" includes any
A REASONABLE PERSPECTIVE ON RECREATIONAL INJURY LIABILITY James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 1988 James C. Kozlowski Driving an automobile is probably the most dangerous activity in our daily lives. Certainly,
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION II STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 40459-1-II Appellant, UNPUBLISHED OPINION v. LOVERA M. BLACKCROW, Respondent. Armstrong, J. The Clallam County Superior
Chapter 5 Civil Law and Procedure Business Law Ms. Turner Crime Offense against society Tort Private or civil wrong; offense against an individual Can sue to receive money damages Can be both a crime and