Close

Articles Posted in Federal Court Procedure

Updated:

U.S. District Court Judge Takes Narrow Reading of ‘Take Home’ Mesothelioma Case That Exposed Worker’s Family

Doris Neumann sued multiple companies, including MW Custom Papers LLC, a manufacturer of friction tape containing high levels of asbestos. In her lawsuit, she claimed she developed mesothelioma caused by her son’s clothing as a gas station attendant. He used a friction tape and wound up bringing stray asbestos fibers…

Updated:

U.S. District Court Decides Future Earning Capacity for Railroad Worker Should Be Left to Jury

Lee Newsome sustained a serious injury to his right foot when a rail hanging from a crane fell on him. He was working for the Wisconsin Central Railroad. Newsome sued the railroad under the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) claiming that his injuries caused him a “loss of future earning…

Updated:

$320,000 Federal Jury Verdict Awarded for Worker’s Fall Injury in Coal Mine

On May 12, 2011, the plaintiff, John Barrow IV, age 58, was a coal mine forklift operator. Barrow walked into a coal mine near Equality, Ill., when a hydraulic hose on the ground caused him to fall and land on his back. The defendant in this case, Temper Fabricators, a fabrication…

Updated:

U.S. Court of Appeals Decides Underinsured Motorist Coverage Regarding Stacking

Toni Dugan was insured by Nationwide Insurance Co. She was involved in an automobile accident with Chelsea Rainey who was insured by American Family Insurance Co. Rainey’s policy had a $100,000 limit, which American Family paid to Dugan and her husband, James. The Dugans’ damages exceeded $200,000, and they made…

Updated:

Amended Federal Rule 37(e) Requires Preservation of All Documents and Electronically Stored Information that Could Be Relevant in an Anticipated Lawsuit

When litigation is possible or pending in a federal case, the litigants should take care to instruct those in possession of documents and especially electronically stored information to preserve and prevent loss of such documents. If the litigation has begun, or is reasonably anticipated, lawyers should send a letter by…

Updated:

Illinois Appellate Court Resolves Breach of Lease Agreement Because of Damage to Property

Menzies Aviation and CenterPoint Properties Trust entered into a 10-year lease for a warehouse near Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport in 2007.  CenterPoint owned the warehouse, while Menzies operated an aircargo handling business that included the use of 15,000- and 30,000-pound forklifts.  The warehouse was a single-story, 185,000-square-foot structure built in…

Updated:

Seventh Circuit Affirms Denial of Employee’s ERISA Benefits Because of a Breach of Fiduciary Duty

James Brooks was severely injured in a work accident in which he lost his left hand, wrist and forearm. Brooks was an assembly-line operator for Prairie Packaging Inc.  The on-the-job incident resulted in the filing of a worker’s compensation claim in 1999, the year of this accident. In addition, Brooks sought recovery…

Updated:

Failures by Franchisee in Making Petroleum Payments Leads to Forfeiture Under Petroleum Marketing Practices Act

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago has affirmed a decision by a trial judge that led to the forfeiture of an oil and gas franchise. Emmanuel Joseph operated a British Petroleum (BP) service station in Chicago.  Sasafrasnet, LLC was the authorized distributor of BP products.  Joseph…

Updated:

U.S. Appeals Court Enters Preliminary Injunction Where Consumers Would be Confused by Similar Tradenames

Kraft is a well-known manufacturer of food products sold in grocery stores.  It has been selling packaged cheeses sold under the trademarked “Cracker Barrel” label.  Kraft has been selling under that name for more than 50 years.  Thousands of grocery stores carry Kraft cheeses bearing that label. Kraft does not sell…

Updated:

U.S. Court of Appeals Affirms Unusually High Attorney Fee Award in Risky Shareholder Lawsuit

In a class action brought by Motorola investors it was maintained that during 2006, the company made false statements in order to disguise its inability to deliver a mobile phone for sale that would employ three different protocols. When it became public that Motorola could not produce the new mobile phone,…

Contact Us