During the early 1900s, manufacturers and wholesalers of alcoholic beverages “tied” retailers to them by providing them with loans, reduced rents, free equipment and other means. Such “tied-house” arrangements caused a vast growth of the number of saloons and bars, resulting in various social evils.
The trial court declined to issue a domestic violence restraining order for two reasons. First, it determined that mental abuse was insufficient, and, second, that past physical abuse was insufficient. The court of Appeal reversed. With regard to mental abuse, the appellate court stated: “In this case, the testimony that the trial court did permit […]
In an action by an insured against an insurance company which denied a claim, plaintiff requested that the trial court give a standard jury instruction explaining that, when a loss is caused by a combination of covered and excluded risks, the loss is covered if the most important or predominant cause is a covered risk. (CACI No. 2306.) Defendant instead proposed a special jury instruction placing on plaintiff the burden of proving the collapse of the house was “caused only by one or more” of the perils listed in the policy, and that there was no coverage if the cause of the collapse involved any peril other than those listed.
A judgment creditor of a $47 million judgment, as part of its efforts to enforce the judgment, propounded requests for production of documents pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 708.030 and later brought a motion to compel. The trial court granted the motion to compel and the judgment debtor appealed. After deciding it is […]
A worker’s compensation doctor provided a man with a psychotropic medication. Another doctor, an anesthesiologist, who had never seen the patient, determined the drug was unnecessary and decertified it for use. Typically a person gradually withdraws from the drug, but in the present case, it was suddenly stopped and the man suffered four seizures, resulting […]
One shareholder sued another shareholder and a small construction firm over a dispute in the operation of the construction firm. Defendant was represented in the suit by a law firm which had been retained by the construction company in 2006 and never discharged; nor had the law firm ever withdrawn from representing the company.
In Citizens United v. FEC (2010) 558 U.S. 310 [130 S.Ct. 876, 175 L.Ed.2d 753, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S. 73], (Citizens United), a divided United States Supreme Court invalidated federal election law restrictions on the political speech of corporations, holding that a speaker’s identity as a corporation, as opposed to natural person, could not […]
Plaintiff obtained a default judgment in January 2013. In July 2013, the trial court entered a revised judgment after defendant moved to vacate the judgment.
Plaintiff, a United Parcel Service [UPS] delivery driver, was injured when he lifted a box with a shipping label prepared by a university that inaccurately stated the weight on the box. Concluding the university owed no duty to plaintiff and that the doctrine of primary assumption of the risk applies, the trial court granted summary […]
In a personal injury action, the trial court granted defendant’s Motion in Limine and excluded three of plaintiff’s proposed witnesses as an evidence sanction for failure to respond completely to an interrogatory. Defendant had sent form interrogatory 12.1 asking about witnesses who witnessed “the incident,” and plaintiff responded with the name and address of one witness.