News

Case Summaries

Civil Rights

[02/08] DG v. DeVaughn
In a class action against the Oklahoma Department of Human Services claiming that the department's agency-wide foster care policies and practices exposed all class members to an impermissible risk of harm, the district court's order certifying a class is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs presented more than conclusory statements that defendants' agency-wide monitoring policies and practices, or lack thereof, created a risk of harm shared by the entire class; 2) due to the common risk of harm and the common underlying legal theory for asserting that risk, the district court acted within its discretion to find that typicality was satisfied; and 3) the injunction sought by plaintiffs applied to the proposed class as a whole without requiring differentiation between class members.

[02/08] Johnson v. Weld County
In an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) action based on defendant's failure to hire plaintiff, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where plaintiff failed to rebut defendant's evidence suggesting that the male candidate it hired as Fiscal Officer had superior qualifications to plaintiff's, as well as its evidence that she was not, at the time of the hiring decision, disabled within the meaning of the ADA.

[02/08] Covell v. Menkis
In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit following his termination by a government agency, summary judgment in favor of the defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that he had a property interest in his employment because he did not establish that there was a mutually explicit understanding that he could only be terminated for cause; and 2) plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the defendant's actions deprived him of a liberty interest.

More...

Injury & Tort Law

[12/11] Whirlpool Corp. v. Camacho
In a products liability action against Whirlpool Corporation, judgment of the court of appeals' that a design defect in an electric Whirlpool clothes dryer caused a fatal fire is reversed as the expert testimony of design defect is legally insufficient to support the verdict.

[12/11] Metro Allied Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Lin
In plaintiff's action against an insurance company for negligence and a violation of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) for failure to procure a commercial general liability (CGL) policy, the judgment of the court of appeals in favor of the plaintiff is reversed and remanded is the causation standard for a claimed failure to procure insurance under a negligence theory and under the DTPA requires proof of the availability of some insurance that would have covered the plaintiff's damages.

[12/11] D.R. Horton-Texas, Ltd. v. Markel Int'l Ins. Co., Ltd.
In an action brought by a general contractor seeking a defense and coverage from the commercial general liability insurer for alleged construction defects, judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the duty to indemnify is not dependent on the duty to defend and an insurer may have a duty to indemnify its insured even if the duty to defend never arises; and 2) in determining coverage, a matter dependent on the facts and circumstances of the alleged injury-causing event, parties may introduce evidence during coverage litigation to establish or refute the duty to indemnify.

More...

Insurance Law

[02/08] Ward v. Dixie Nat'l Life Ins. Co.
In a class action lawsuit against multiple insurance companies alleging that defendants violated a contractual promise under insurance policies to pay policyholders the "actual charges" of cancer treatments, judgment in favor of the plaintiffs is affirmed where: 1) under the three-step retroactivity analysis, the presumption against retroactivity operates to bar the application of the South Carolina statute to the claims in this case; and 2) defendants' remaining arguments are meritless.

[12/11] Metro Allied Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Lin
In plaintiff's action against an insurance company for negligence and a violation of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) for failure to procure a commercial general liability (CGL) policy, the judgment of the court of appeals in favor of the plaintiff is reversed and remanded is the causation standard for a claimed failure to procure insurance under a negligence theory and under the DTPA requires proof of the availability of some insurance that would have covered the plaintiff's damages.

[12/11] D.R. Horton-Texas, Ltd. v. Markel Int'l Ins. Co., Ltd.
In an action brought by a general contractor seeking a defense and coverage from the commercial general liability insurer for alleged construction defects, judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the duty to indemnify is not dependent on the duty to defend and an insurer may have a duty to indemnify its insured even if the duty to defend never arises; and 2) in determining coverage, a matter dependent on the facts and circumstances of the alleged injury-causing event, parties may introduce evidence during coverage litigation to establish or refute the duty to indemnify.

More...

Criminal Law & Procedure

[02/08] US v. Schneider
In a prosecution for impermissibly dispensing controlled drugs, an order excluding evidence of all but one of the eighteen deaths charged in one count of the indictment and the court's placement of a ten-day limitation on the government's time to present its case is vacated where the district court's ruling effectively dismissed separately charged conduct brought by the government against defendants, and thus impermissibly intruded upon the authority of the executive branch to design a criminal prosecution in the way it deemed most prudent.

[01/14] State of Florida v. Nelson
In a conviction of a juvenile defendant for burglary and related crime, the decision of the Fourth District is quashed and remanded as, when the State is entitled to the recapture period, a continuance that is chargeable to the defense and made after the expiration of the speedy trial period but before a defendant files a notice expiration waives a defendant's speedy trial rights under the default period of the rule.

[01/14] Johnson v. State of Florida
Defendant's request for postconviction relief is granted and the death sentences vacated and remanded where the newly disclosed evidence shows the following: 1) after defendant was arrested and counsel was appointed, the State intentionally created a situation likely to induce defendant to make incriminating statements to a jailhouse informant in violation of defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel; 2) although the prosecutor at defendant's first trial knew that his statements were impermissibly elicited and that his testimony was inadmissible, the prosecutor knowingly used false testimony and misleading argument to convince the court to admit the testimony; and 3) because defendant's testimony was admitted and later used by a different prosecutor at defendant's 1988 trial, and because the State has failed to show that this error did not contribute to the jury's advisory sentences of death, the death sentences are vacated and remanded under Giglio v. US.

More...

Labor & Employment Law

[02/08] Johnson v. Weld County
In an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) action based on defendant's failure to hire plaintiff, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where plaintiff failed to rebut defendant's evidence suggesting that the male candidate it hired as Fiscal Officer had superior qualifications to plaintiff's, as well as its evidence that she was not, at the time of the hiring decision, disabled within the meaning of the ADA.

[02/08] Covell v. Menkis
In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit following his termination by a government agency, summary judgment in favor of the defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that he had a property interest in his employment because he did not establish that there was a mutually explicit understanding that he could only be terminated for cause; and 2) plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the defendant's actions deprived him of a liberty interest.

[02/08] Turner v. Saloon, Ltd.
In plaintiff's employment discrimination suit against his former employer, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the judgment of the district court is affirmed to the extent that it dismissed plaintiff's ADA claims, his overtime claims, and his Title VII retaliation claim; but 2) judgment of the district court with respect to plaintiff's hostile-workplace claim based on alleged sexual harassment is reversed and remanded as the court dismissed the claim after excluding most of the alleged instances of harassment as time-barred, contrary to Supreme Court precedent establishing that in a hostile-workplace claim, acts of harassment falling outside Title VII's statute of limitations may be considered as long as some act of harassment occurred within the limitations period.

More...