all - Opinion Summaries

HUGHES v. WAL-MART STORES, INC.

Civil Procedure, Injury & Tort Law
Where plaintiffs' residence, the place where they purchased the allegedly defective item and the site of the accident were all in Louisiana, but...

LATUZKIN v. CHICAGO POLICE DEPT.

Civil Rights, Injury & Tort Law
Plaintiff cannot maintain a 42 USC 1983 claim against city where he claimed that a policy or custom of the defendant's policy department led to...

COOKE v. STEFANI MGMT SERVS., INC.

Injury & Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law
Where plaintiff-employee lacks evidence establishing that his employer had any actual knowledge of harassing supervisor's conduct, nothing more than...

BP N. AM. PETROLEUM v. SOLAR ST

Contracts, Injury & Tort Law, Oil and Gas Law
Where plaintiff attempts to mitigate damages by trading in the commodity futures market, the district court's award of damages needs to reflect this...

COOPER INDUS., INC. v. LEATHERMANTOOL GROUP, INC.

Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law, Injury & Tort Law
The Constitution requires that appellate courts review punitive damages awards using a de novo standard rather than a deferential standard.

JOHNSON v. CITY OF EVANSTON

Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Injury & Tort Law
Alleging that police seized and continue to hold plaintiff's car without any colorable claim of authority states valid civil rights claim under 42 USC...

ADAMS v. CITY OF BATTLE CREEK

Communications Law, Injury & Tort Law
Under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, a police department may not tap a police officer's pager without notice to the officer, and...

CAPPARELLI, JR. v. ZAUSMER FRISCH ASSOCS., INC.

Injury & Tort Law
Property owners and contractors may be liable under Labor Law 240(1) when an objects falls on a plaintiff-worker at a construction site, but not if...

CLAMPITT v. D.J. SPENCER SALES

Injury & Tort Law
An abrupt stop, by itself, is insufficient to overcome the presumption that the rear driver is negligent in a rear-end collision even if there is...

AM. TRANSITIONAL CARE CTRS. OF TEXAS, INC. v. PALACIOS

Injury & Tort Law
Under section 13.01 of the Medical Liability and Insurance Improvement Act, the stanard for reviewing an expert report is abuse of discretion.