Advertising Disclosure Email Disclosure

Law Alerts

State
Practice Area
Keyword

Pages

Absent a showing by the claimant that the employer deliberately subverted a third party-suit brought by the employee, the employer's right to subrogation under §319 of the Act is virtually absolute.
Pennsylvania • Workers' Compensation • April 11, 2013
The claimant sustained injuries in the course and scope of his employment as a police officer when he lost control of a motorcycle he was on while training and it fell on top of him. The claimant's injuries were acknowledged by the employer as..., Case Law Alerts - 2nd Quarter 2013
Florida Appeals Court holds that association is jointly and severally liable for past due assessments.
Georgia • Real Estate E&O Liability • April 11, 2013
In July 2008, the Association initiated lien foreclosure proceedings against the owner of Unit 402 ("the Unit") in the Spiaggia Ocean Condominium. In July 2009, the Association obtained a default final judgment of foreclosure, and a..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Quarter 2013
Insurer has no basis to argue for dismissal for failure to obtain a guardian due to age-related cognitive disabilities.
Federal • Insurance Coverage/Bad Faith Litigation • April 11, 2013
The court determined that an insurer has no basis to obtain a dismissal based on an elderly insured's failure to file for guardianship. The plaintiff suffered from age-related cognitive disabilities and had granted power of attorney to her son...., Case Law Alerts - 2nd Quarter 2013
Prisoner's claim under the First Amendment right to access the courts fails as plaintiff failed to allege his claims were not previously adjudicated.
Federal • Public Entity and Civil Rights Litigation • April 11, 2013
The plaintiff, an inmate in a state correctional institute, filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983, alleging that prison defendants violated his First Amendment right to access the courts by failing to timely deliver his notice of..., Case Law Alerts - 2nd Quarter 2013
Claimant seeking reinstatement after previously refusing a light-duty job in bad faith must show work injury has worsened, as well as prove an inability to do light-duty job. Claimant not relieved of burden simply because prior job was a funded position.
Pennsylvania • Workers' Compensation • April 11, 2013
Following the claimant's work injury, the employer referred the claimant to an employer for a funded employment position. The position was a sedentary job that paid less than the claimant's pre-injury wage and was approved by the claimant..., Case Law Alerts - 2nd Quarter 2013
Allegations and plaintiff's certification that mayor controlled day-to-day activities of township in which plaintiff was employed were sufficient to draw reasonable inference that mayor was plaintiff's employer and defeat 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
New Jersey • Real Estate E&O Liability • April 11, 2013
The plaintiff, the tax collector of Weehawken, New Jersey, alleged that he was subjected to six acts of retaliation by his employers, the Township of Weehawken, its mayor and its town manager, after he submitted a certification in support of a civil..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Quarter 2013
The entire controversy doctrine bars a plaintiff from subsequently bringing a bad faith claim due to a failure to settle a first-party UM claim.
New Jersey • Insurance Coverage/Bad Faith Litigation • April 11, 2013
Before the court was the plaintiffs' appeal from an order granting summary judgment to their insurer, defendant New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Company. The plaintiffs alleged that their insurer had acted in bad faith by failing to settle..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Quarter 2013
OPRA mandates release of public records for outsourcing jobs.
New Jersey • Public Entity and Civil Rights Litigation • April 11, 2013
The plaintiff filed an action seeking a judgment declaring the defendant-school district and its custodian of records in violation of the Open Public Records Act (OPRA) and in violation of the common law right of access to public records. The..., Case Law Alerts - 2nd Quarter 2013
In a petition to suspend the benefits of an unauthorized worker, the employer must show that the claimant is unauthorized and that the claimant is no longer totally disabled.
Pennsylvania • Workers' Compensation • April 11, 2013
The claimant suffered an injury while working for the employer and brought a claim against the Pennsylvania Uninsured Guaranty Fund (Guaranty Fund). The Workers' Compensation Judge granted the claim brought against the Guaranty Fund, awarding..., Case Law Alerts - 2nd Quarter 2013
Employee failed to establish causal connection between request for future leave and termination when employer immediately offered employee a salary increase and suggested she join its medical insurance plan when she informed employer she may have cancer.
Federal • Employment Law • April 11, 2013
The plaintiff alleged that she was retaliated against in violation of the ADA after she advised her employer that she may have cancer and may need time off in the future for medical treatments and was laid off approximately three months later. In..., Case Law Alert - 2nd Quarter 2013

Pages

© 2013 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1

Please read the following disclaimer:

Thank you for your interest in our firm. The information contained on this Website contains statements, videos and other content about the type and quality of services offered by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, as well as past results and testimonials about the firm. This information has not been reviewed nor approved by the Florida Bar.

  • The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from the matters in which results and/or testimonials have been provided.
  • All results of cases handled by the firm are not provided and not all clients have given testimonials.
  • The results and testimonials provided are not necessarily representative of results obtained by any individual attorney or by the firm nor of the experience of all clients or others with the firm. Every case is different, and each client's case must be evaluated and handled on its own merits.


Please acknowledge that you have read the above disclaimer by clicking on one of the two links below.

YES I have read and understand the above statements. I am interested in learning more about Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin. NO I do not want to view the information.

Before you send this email please note:

You are attempting to send email, through a link on our website, to an attorney of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin or an employee in our firm. Please note that your email may not be treated as confidential and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should not rely upon the transmission of an email through this website if you are seeking to enter into such a relationship. Until such time as we have agreed to represent you, no information in your email will be treated as confidential. Please contact us directly by telephone at 1.800.220.3308 if it is your intent to seek legal counsel with our firm or convey confidential information.

If it is still your intent to send this email, knowing that it may not be treated as confidential, you may accept our terms of agreement by pressing "OK". If you choose not to accept these terms of agreement you may navigate away from this page by pressing "Cancel."