WASHINGTON – A federal statute makes it mandatory for victims of child pornography to get restitution for the losses they suffer. But federal court rulings deciding how those losses should be categorized and what proof is required to establish liability are so divergent that the term “circuit split” doesn’t quite cut it. It’s more like a “circuit shatter.”
The government was not required to prove that all of a child pornography victim’s alleged losses were proximately caused by a defendant in order to award restitution, the en banc 5th Circuit has ruled.
Although the case was closer than expected, attorneys who represent railroad workers are applauding the Supreme Court’s ruling last week that applied a relaxed causation standard to injury claims under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act.
An injured railroad worker suing under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act need only prove that the railroad company’s negligence played a part – no matter how small – in his injury, the Supreme Court has ruled in a 5-4 decision.
A medical malpractice plaintiff could not succeed on a claim based on lack of informed consent because she failed to establish causation under a “reasonable person” standard, the Delaware Supreme Court has ruled in affirming judgment.
The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court took on that question during oral arguments Monday in CSX Transportation v. McBride.
An alleged victim of clergy sex abuse should have been allowed to introduce expert testimony on the general cause of his mental injuries, the Delaware Supreme Court has ruled in granting a new trial.
A wrongful death lawsuit may be based on a claim that a patient’s suicide was caused by post-surgical pain from a negligently performed medical procedure, the Missouri Supreme Court has ruled in reversing a summary judgment.