Legal News

Case Summaries

Workers' Comp

[07/22] Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers' Assoc. v. County of Los Angeles
In a case brought by certain retired deputy sheriffs challenging Los Angeles county's policies concerning payment for excess accumulated vacation hours, judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed where the policy discriminated against deputies suffering work-related injuries in violation of Labor Code section 4850.

[07/15] Kirksey v. Tonghai Maritime
In a negligence action brought under 33 U.S.C. section 905(b), judgment for plaintiff is reversed, the case remanded, and judgment rendered for defendants where: 1) a defect in the cargo stow was open and obvious to plaintiff; and 2) defendants did not have a turnover duty to warn or to furnish a reasonably safe ship against an obvious defect or unsafe condition.

[05/28] Arteaga v. Brink's, Inc.
In a suit brought by a former employee, who was discharged after being subjected to an internal investigation of missing cash, asserting claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) for physical disability discrimination and alleged wrongful termination of employment in retaliation for filing workers' compensation claims, summary judgment for employer is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's reported symptoms of pain and numbness did not constitute a "physical disability" under the FEHA; 2) employer's lack of confidence in plaintiff-employee as a result of the internal investigation constituted a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for termination; and 3) although temporal proximity existed between plaintiff-employee's disclosure of symptoms and subsequent discharge, it did not create a triable fact as to pretext in light of the performance issues raised by employer before he engaged in protected activity.

[05/22] McLaurin v. Noble Drilling (US) Inc.
In a negligence action, summary judgment for defendant is reversed and remanded where: 1) a claim under section 905(b) of the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) for vessel negligence is not cognizable since plaintiff was not injured "on navigable waters;" and 2) section 933 of the LHWCA preserves a maritime worker's ability to pursue separate claims against third parties including vessel owners allegedly responsible for the injury.

[05/20] Ramirez v. Murdick
In a claim for liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs for the late payment of Workers' Compensation benefits, summary judgment for the defendants is affirmed where: 1) the remedies under section 2357 do not apply since payment was mailed by the defendant within the thirty day period; and 2) the court did not err in converting plaintiff's motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment since the plaintiff could not recover under the facts.

More...

Injury & Tort Law

[07/23] Poliner v. Texas Health Sys.
In a defamation action by a physician against a hospital which suspended his clinical privileges for offering susbstandard patient care, judgment for plaintiff is reversed where peer reviewers who imposed temporary privilege restrictions during a review of plaintiff's patient care history were entitled to immunity under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) because they: 1) held an objectively reasonable belief that their actions were in furtherance of quality health care; 2) made a reasonable effort to obtain the necessary facts; 3) followed the notice and hearing procedures required by HCQIA; and 4) acted reasonably based upon the facts obtained.

[07/23] Howard v. Waide
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action against several state correctional department employees alleging deliberate indifference in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights, dismissal and summary judgment rulings against plaintiff are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) a grievance officer's motion to dismiss was properly granted; but 2) plaintiff proffered adequate evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding defendants-correctional officers' subjective knowledge of a significant risk of substantial harm; and 3) plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies on some, but not all, of his claims.

[07/23] Montano v. Chicago
In a suit seeking recovery for injuries suffered by plaintiffs in confrontations with police, dismissals of plaintiffs' claims are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the district court clearly erred in dismissing plaintiffs' claims with prejudice as a sanction for abuse of the judicial process; 2) judgments as a matter of law for police officers on certain claims was error as there was an evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for plaintiffs; 3) summary judgment for defendants on claims that they lacked probable cause to arrest plaintiffs for public drinking and disorderly conduct, and that they failed to intervene to prevent the use of excessive force by other officers, was proper; and 4) summary judgment for city on a liability claim under Monell was proper where plaintiffs failed to produce evidence to show deliberate indifference by the police board to constitutional violations by its officers.

[07/23] Gil v. Reed
In an inmate's negligence, malpractice, and civil rights suit against prison medical staff, summary judgment for defendants is reversed where the record contained sufficient evidence to show genuine issues of material fact on: 1) inmate's Eighth Amendment claim that prison staff were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs; and 2) whether defendants had met the standard of care, using the state-law standard as required by the Federal Tort Claims Act.

[07/21] Hoag v. Amex Ins. Co.
Dismissal of plaintiff's uninsured-motorist claim as a sanction for his failure to provide discovery as ordered by the trial court was neither too extreme nor an abuse of discretion where the failures were willful and repeated.

More...