A state law that places a $50,000 cap on a personal injury plaintiff’s punitive damages does not violate the state constitution, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled in reversing judgment.
A vendor could be liable for a motor vehicle accident that was allegedly caused by the distraction created by cargo that was improperly loaded onto a customer’s vehicle, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in reversing judgment.
WASHINGTON – New proposed regulations would impose stricter safety requirements on child care providers who receive federal funding.
The “open and obvious danger” rule does not apply to preclude a finding of negligence in a premises liability action filed by a tenant who was injured when he unsuccessfully attempted to flip into an inflatable pool from a trampoline, Massachusetts’ highest court has ruled in reversing a defense verdict.
The Indiana Supreme Court has overturned a lower court ruling that the state’s $50,000 cap on punitive damages violated a personal injury plaintiff’s right to a jury trial.
A doctor treating a patient for an inoperable brain tumor did not owe a duty of care to a third party injured when the patient suffered a grand mal seizure while driving, Massachusetts’ highest court has ruled in affirming summary judgment.
The mother and adult daughter of the victim of an airplane crash had the capacity to sue the federal government for the alleged negligence of a flight controller, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in reversing a dismissal.
New York defense attorneys were having a good laugh back in 2009. The snickering was over the story of a well-known medical malpractice lawyer who lost his case after turning down an $8 million settlement offer.
But no one’s laughing now.
A California judge has thrown out a $6.5 million product liability verdict against Takeda Pharmaceuticals, deciding that a key expert witness should not have been allowed to testify that the diabetes drug Actos was the cause of a man’s bladder cancer.