Publications
Third Circuit holds Uber drivers are not exempt from Federal Arbitration Act and are subject to binding arbitration.
The Third Circuit joined the First and Ninth Circuits in holding that Uber drivers are not exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and, therefore, are subject to binding arbitration.
Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
The workers’ compensation exclusivity exception must be narrowly construed and the contract at issue must contain sufficient language to establish a third-party indemnity obligation.
The plaintiff originally asserted several theories of liability in his complaint, including negligence and breach of express and implied warranties against the defendants, the manufacturer/seller of industrial equipment and the licensor/seller of
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
An expert witness, retained and presented as a life care planner, may not use their own medical opinion in calculating future care when that care is not recommended by a treating physician or retained medical expert.
The plaintiff retained a life care planner, who was also a neurosurgeon, to calculate future medical care, including epidural steroid injections and facet joint injections, that were not recommended by either a treating physician or medical expert
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Emergency vehicle driver may be found reckless if he runs a red light, even with lights and sirens on, for purposes of Ohio Revised Code 2744.03.
The plaintiff was approaching an intersection at the same time as a township fire truck, resulting in a collision. The plaintiff sued the township and the driver of the fire truck, a township employee.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Relying upon dicta set forth in Spencer v. Johnson, trial court held that the Pennsylvania Fair Share Act was inapplicable to multiple defendants unless a plaintiff had some amount of contributory negligence.
In a non-jury trial, the plaintiff raised negligence and battery claims against the defendants, which arose from an incident in which one defendant shot the plaintiff in the shoulder with a gun that was owned by the other defendant.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
SCOTUS grants certiorari to hear marine insurance dispute.
The Supreme Court of the United States recently granted certiorari to decide whether, under federal admiralty law, “a choice of law clause in a maritime contract can be rendered unenforceable if enforcement is contrary to the ‘strong public policy
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Not all personal injury accidents involving repair work are applicable to New York Labor Law §241 claims.
An employee of an elevator mechanic company was assigned to repair the freight elevator located within the premises.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Why insurance carriers’ DPRPs should be specific as to what claims/actions are and are not arbitrable to protect themselves against motions to dismiss.
GEICO filed a complaint against a series of medical providers asserting claims under the New Jersey Insurance Fraud Prevention Act (IFPA), violations of RICO, common law fraud and unjust enrichment.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
In applying Pennsylvania law, the court held that determination of whether a dangerous condition is obvious and avoidable by the exercise of ordinary care is generally a question of fact reserved for the jury.
In this diversity jurisdiction matter, the plaintiff alleged that she suffered injuries after tripping and falling on a partially empty black pallet or “stack base” while shopping in the defendant’s store.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
District Court makes interesting observations regarding evidence of industry standards and alternative designs in ruling on motion to preclude experts.
In this product liability action, the trial court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motions to preclude the plaintiff’s experts. This case involved an allegedly defective lift gate on the rear of a truck trailer.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.