Advertising Disclosure Email Disclosure

Law Alerts

State
Practice Area
Keyword

Pages

Sufficiency of evidence for claim of negligent hiring and retention.
New Jersey • Employment Law • January 11, 2013
The plaintiff claimed that she was sexually assaulted by a Wyndam employee while she was in the course of her work duties. The plaintiff alleged that Wyndham was on notice of its employee's reputation for a quick temper and that he was involved..., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment was denied, in part, where both parties raised plausible coverage arguments. However, motion was granted with respect to plaintiff’s bad faith claim.
Ohio • Insurance Coverage/Bad Faith Litigation • January 11, 2013
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern District, considered the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. This matter arose from the defendant insurer’s decision to deny coverage under an umbrella..., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
Non-signatory third party to arbitration clause is compelled to arbitrate securities case.
New Jersey • Securities and Investment Professional Liability • January 11, 2013
The plaintiffs filed a FINRA arbitration against a broker dealer and its registered representative while filing a contemporaneous New Jersey state court action against an accounting firm. Both actions stemmed from the alleged recommendation to..., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
Standard for entitlement to good faith defense under FLSA and NJWHL.
New Jersey • Employment Law • January 11, 2013
Blue Sky was found to have violated both the FLSA and NJWHL by failing to pay overtime wages to its mechanics. Blue Sky asserted that the New Jersey Department of Labor had conducted an audit and that the investigator had determined the mechanics..., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
Motion for reconsideration granted and plaintiff’s waiver and estoppel claims dismissed where defendant was able to show it had timely reserved its rights with respect to property damage claim.
Ohio • Insurance Coverage/Bad Faith Litigation • January 11, 2013
This matter arose due to the plaintiff’s claim for property damage under his homeowners' insurance policy with the defendant following two fires at his residence. The policy provided that it was void if any insured “intentionally..., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
In a parking lot case, the Board finds the claimant's motor vehicle accident occurred within the course and scope of his employment because the claimant had returned to the employer's premises from an unpaid lunch break but had not yet clocked back in.
Delaware • Workers' Compensation • January 11, 2013
This case involved a Petition to Determine Compensation Due alleging that the claimant sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident on February 25, 2012, on an access roadway that was owned and controlled by his employer. The employer contended..., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
Appellate Division held that litigation privilege does not bar client's malpractice claim against his/her attorney.
New Jersey • Professional Liability • January 11, 2013
The issue in this appeal is whether the trial court properly dismissed the plaintiff's, Buchanan, claim for malpractice against the attorneys who represented him in the underlying matter. Buchanan represented the Kerrs in filing for bankruptcy...., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
Suit with third party driver properly consolidated with UIM claim where the claims had common issues of law and fact; however, forum selection clause required that UIM claim be filed in court where insured resided at time of accident.
Pennsylvania • Insurance Coverage/Bad Faith Litigation • January 11, 2013
The plaintiff sued the third party driver, as well as their underinsured motorist carrier, following a motor vehicle accident. The underinsured motorist carrier filed preliminary objections to the jointly filed claim, arguing that they had been..., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
Board grants employer’s motion to suspend claimant’s TTD benefits. Claimant was incarcerated and still awaiting trial on violation of probation charges but had already been convicted of underlying criminal charges that put him on probation.
Delaware • Workers' Compensation • January 11, 2013
This case dealt with the application of Section 2353(d) of the Act, which provides that a claimant who is receiving disability benefits can have them suspended when he is incarcerated by the state after an adjudication of guilt. As of March 2011,..., Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013
Appellate division held, nature and scope of any attorney’s professional responsibilities may be outside ken and experience of average lay juror; however, no expert needed when defendant attorney testifies to specific failure in underlying representation.
New Jersey • Professional Liability • January 11, 2013
The plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed on a motion based upon her failure to produce expert opinion regarding the standard of professional care applicable to the defendants in the course of their representation of plaintiff in the purchase of..., Case Law Alert - 1st 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."