Mealey Publications™
TOP STORIES
RICHMOND, Va. — The Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should affirm a bankruptcy court’s denial of a “belated and meritless” motion to dismiss the Chapter 11 case of Georgia-Pacific spinoff Bestwall LLC by the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants because Bestwall has “a valid reorganizational purpose” and “sufficient financial distress” to pursue relief in good faith under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the debtor says in a Nov. 1 response brief.
TRENTON, N.J. — A New Jersey appellate court on Nov. 1 affirmed a lower court ruling granting summary judgment to an insurer and rescinding for material misrepresentation a $1 million nonowned auto liability policy issued to a business operating a summer camp, finding that the lower court correctly determined that there was no ambiguity in a question in the policy application where the insured answered in the negative regarding renting vehicles but actually rented vans that were not covered under the policy.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 4 declined to review a case in which a father involved in a custody dispute challenged a ruling in which a divided Nevada Supreme Court declared state laws to be unconstitutional because they presumptively sealed child custody court proceedings.
LANSING, Mich. — A divided Michigan Supreme Court on Nov. 1 reversed a split lower appellate panel ruling that a challenge to a state statute on which a COVID-era executive order imposing restrictions on gathering size was based was not moot and remanded the case to the appellate court for entry of an order granting summary disposition in favor of the director of the state department of health and human services.
BATON ROUGE, La. — A Louisiana law that classifies misoprostol and mifepristone — two drugs used to induce early termination of pregnancy — as controlled dangerous substances is unconstitutional because it “threatens access to lifesaving medications for certain patients, and improperly interferes with timely and appropriate access for others with a range of physical conditions,” a doula practice in the state and others alleges in a complaint filed in state court.
SAN FRANCISCO — A trial court overseeing an asbestos case that produced a $10.1 million verdict erred in issuing a directed verdict on the sophisticated user defense in the case of an automobile shop owner and by failing to list certain potentially liable parties on the verdict sheet, a California appeals court panel said in reversing and remanding for a new trial.
HOUSTON — A split Texas appeals court panel on Oct. 31 affirmed a lower court’s ruling in favor of Exxon Mobil Corp. in a silica injury lawsuit brought by a worker who sandblasted railcars and contended that he developed pulmonary fibrosis because the company created a situation in which he had to perform an “intrinsically unsafe and ultrahazardous activity.” The panel held that the worker’s experts were not reliable.
CHEYENNE, Wyo. — A commercial insurer on Oct. 31 sued its insured trucking company and the company’s purported owners in a Wyoming federal court, seeking a declaration that the policy issued to the insured is void due to alleged material misrepresentations regarding ownership of the company and there is no duty to defend or indemnify the company in an underlying suit.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 31 set for argument a case in which Free Speech Coalition Inc. (FSC), a nonprofit adult industry trade association, along with adult entertainment industry petitioners, urge reversal of a ruling by the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that vacated an injunction of a Texas law requiring the operators of pornographic websites to verify that their visitors are adults, which the petitioners say “imposes a content-based burden on adults’ access to constitutionally protected speech.”
WILMINGTON, Del. — While a federal judge in Delaware held that a defendant online sports gambling company is the prevailing party in a suit brought against it by a patent owner accusing it of infringement, he said the company is not owed attorney fees or other costs because the case is not “exceptional” as defined under the Patent Act.
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge granted final approval to a nearly $20 million settlement resolving claims that insurers including Allianz Global Assistance (AGA) violated California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws in relation to its online marketing of travel and event insurance, with the plaintiffs’ attorneys awarded nearly $5 million in attorney fees.