8th Circuit Issues 1st Appellate ERISA Forfeiture Decision, Orders Remand
ST. LOUIS — Becoming the first appellate court to weigh in on a growing wave of Employee Retirement Income Security Act forfeiture cases, the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 12 affirmed dismissal for lack of standing but ordered remand because it agreed with the appellant “that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing his complaint with prejudice.”
D.C. Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of FCA Suit Alleging Urine Drug Testing Fraud
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals on May 11 affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a relator’s qui tam suit alleging violations of the False Claims Act (FCA) and similar state and District of Columbia laws related to outpatient opioid treatment centers’ billing to government insurers for alleged unnecessary urine drug tests and the use of unlicensed addiction counselors, finding in part that the relator “failed to sufficiently allege that false claims based on medically unnecessary urine drug tests were submitted to the government for payment.”
Capacity Exclusion Bars D&O Coverage For Pharmaceutical Company, Majority Affirms
TRENTON, N.J. — A majority of the New Jersey Supreme Court on May 11 held that a directors and officers liability insurance policy’s capacity exclusion bars coverage for an underlying lawsuit brought against a pharmaceutical company insured and that the insurer had the right to refuse to contribute to the settlement of the underlying case.
High Court Extends Stay In Mifepristone Case As Parties Debate Nationwide Impact
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. on May 11 extended an administrative stay on a Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision that granted Louisiana’s motion to stay the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 2023 decision that removed the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone, one of two drugs used to induce early termination of pregnancy, as the state, the manufacturers of the drug and amici from both sides of the political spectrum weigh in on what the court should do.
Claims That Nestlé Protein Drink Concealed Sugar Are Preempted, Judge Says
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California federal judge on May 11 dismissed with prejudice a putative class complaint against Nestlé Health Science US Holdings Inc. for violating California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other laws by allegedly misrepresenting a breakfast drink as healthy and containing protein on its front label when it actually contained more sugar than protein per serving, finding that the claims are preempted because the consumer’s theory contradicts federal labeling requirements.
8th Circuit Affirms AD&D Ruling Against Widow Of Man Who Died After Fall
ST. LOUIS — Saying it agreed with the administrator of an accidental death and dismemberment (AD&D) plan that the “claim was not covered under the plan and that an exclusion applied,” the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 11 affirmed judgment in a case concerning an insured who fell and hit his head while on blood thinners, developed a subdural hematoma and then died.
Panel Affirms Ruling Denying Motion For New Trial In Storm Coverage Dispute
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — In an insurance dispute over coverage for damage purportedly caused by a storm, a Florida appellate court affirmed a lower court’s order denying homeowners’ motion for a new trial after a jury returned a verdict in favor of the insurer.
Texas Panel Reverses, Remands Over $5.4 million Judgment In ‘Novel’ USERRA Case
AUSTIN, Texas — Addressing “an issue of first impression in Texas, and perhaps the nation” under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA), a state appeals court panel held that because of “erroneous” jury instructions, a trial court’s judgment awarding a former reservist more than $5.4 million in wages, benefits, interest and attorney fees in a lawsuit against the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) “must be reversed” and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings.
Texas High Court: No Basis To Prohibit Appraisal In Flood Coverage Dispute
AUSTIN, Texas — The Texas Supreme Court on May 8 conditionally granted mandamus relief to relator insurers, holding that a lower court abused its discretion in denying the insurers’ motion to compel appraisal of their insureds’ flood damage loss to a food distribution warehouse because the record amply establishes that the parties’ disagreement is at least partly about the insureds’ amount of loss.
Oregon Supreme Court: County Bans On Flavored Tobacco Not Preempted By State Law
SALEM, Ore. — The Oregon Supreme Court affirmed an appellate court and upheld its reversal of a county circuit court’s ruling in favor of vape and hookah business owners blocking a county ban of flavored tobacco sales, opining that the Oregon state law regulating tobacco sales does not bar counties from enacting their own regulations on tobacco sales.
Nicotine Pouches Are Taxable ‘Tobacco Products,’ Texas Supreme Court Says
AUSTIN, Texas — The Texas Supreme Court on May 8 reversed an appellate court in part and held that oral nicotine pouches satisfy the state tax code’s definition of tobacco products because the products’ powdered composition including nontobacco matter and nicotine isolate is a taxable “tobacco substitute” and remanded the pouch-maker’s constitutional challenge to the tax code for further review.