In the News

Case Summaries

Injury & Tort Law

[10/21] Al Shimari v. CACI Premier Technology, Inc.
In a civil action filed by four Iraqi nationals, alleging that they were abused while detained in the custody of the U.S. Army at Abu Ghraib prison, located near Baghdad, Iraq, in 2003 and 2004, brought pursuant to the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), 28 U.S.C. section 1350, that defendant's employees committed acts involving torture and war crimes, and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and also asserting various tort claims under the common law, including assault and battery, sexual assault and battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, the District Court's judgment is vacated where it erred in its analysis by failing to determine whether the military exercised actual control over any of defendant's alleged conduct.

[10/19] Huang v. The Bicycle Casino, Inc.
In an injury and tort action arising after plaintiff was injured while boarding defendant's shuttle bus, the trial court's grant of summary judgment to defendant is reversed where: 1) it is a triable issue of material fact whether defendant operated as a common carrier; and 2) the trial court erred in finding an exemption from defendant's duty of care as a matter of law.

[10/18] Nava v. Saddleback Memorial Medical Center
In a negligence suit brought by a patient injured while he was being transported in the hospital on a gurney, filed more than one year, but less than two years, after his injury, the trial court's grant of defendants' motion for summary judgment, concluding the complaint was time-barred by Code of Civil Procedure section 340.5, which imposes a one-year statute of limitations when an injury is caused by the professional negligence of a health care provider, is affirmed where plaintiff's claims were barred by Code of Civil Procedure section 340.5's statute of limitations because the transfer of plaintiff in the hospital on a gurney was integrally related to his medical treatment or diagnosis, and, therefore, the injury occurred in the rendering of professional services.

[10/18] Hargus v. Ferocious and Impetuous, LLC
In a negligence action against the owner and captain of a chartered vessel, for injuries plaintiff sustained while aboard the boat, the District Court's judgment in plaintiff's favor is vacated where the tortious act giving rise to plaintiff's claim was insufficient to invoke maritime jurisdiction because the act was not of the type that could potentially disrupt maritime commerce.

Read More

Workers' Comp

[08/17] Kerrigan v. MSPB
In an appeal of a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board dismissing, for lack of jurisdiction, his claim that his workers' compensation benefits were improperly terminated in retaliation for protected whistleblowing activity, the Board's decision is affirmed where, although the Board incorrectly held that 5 U.S.C. section 8128(b) bars its review of petitioner's appeal, petitioner failed to make a nonfrivolous allegation that his protected disclosure was a contributing factor in the agency's action.

[08/11] Truck Insurance Exchange v. WCAB
In a worker's comp case in which employer received notification of the injury the day after it happened by a workers compensation claim was not submitted to insurer until more than seven years later, the order excluding laches as an affirmative defense is affirmed where laces does not apply because notice to or knowledge of a workplace injury on the part of the employer is deemed to be notice to or knowledge of the insurer.

[06/22] State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WCAB
In an action seeking review of a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board regarding the medical necessity of proposed treatment requested by an employee of the California Highway Patrol (CHP), involving Labor Code Section 4610.6, which created a new procedure--independent medical review (IMR)--that an injured worker may use to challenge an employer's timely denial, delay or modification of a request for authorization of proposed medical treatment, the Board's decision is reversed where the 30-day time limit in section 4610.6(d), is directory and, accordingly, an untimely IMR determination is valid and binding upon the parties as the final determination of the director.

[05/11] SSA Terminals and Homeport Ins. Co. v. Carrion
In an action brought by a claimant seeking disability benefits under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, an employer/insurer's petition for review of a decision by the Benefits Review Board is denied where: 1) the claimant timely filed his claim against his employer; 2) claimant's knee injury was a permanent, rather than a temporary, disability; and 3) the doctrines of exhaustion and waiver were inapplicable because claimant presented his claim of permanent disability well before the conclusion of the administrative process and neither the employer nor the agency was blindsided by the argument.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.