News

Case Summaries

Injury & Tort Law

[02/09] Delgado v. Pawtucket Police Dep't
In a state law tort action over which the federal district court retained supplemental jurisdiction after dismissing the plaintiffs' federal claims, the district court's grant of a defense motion for judgment as a matter of law is affirmed, where: 1) the district court appropriately exercised its discretion to retain jurisdiction over the case; 2) the district court was correct to reject the plaintiffs' construction of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(4)(C) and to refuse to admit a witness's deposition where it had found that he was available for live testimony; 3) there was no abuse of discretion in the district court's decision to deny the plaintiffs' mid-trial request for a continuance so they could procure the witness's live testimony through a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum; and 4) there was no error in the allowance of the defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law, absent sufficient evidence on the issue of breach of duty.

[02/09] Hecimovich v. Encinal School Parent Teacher Organization
In an action asserting defamation and other causes involving a youth athletics coach, in which the defendants filed an anti-SLAPP motion, the trial court's denial of the motion is reversed, and the action is ordered to be stricken, where: 1) defamation actions can be activity against which a defendant is protected under the anti-SLAPP law; 2) the plaintiff's lawsuit involved an issue of public interest; and 3) the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a likelihood of prevailing on the merits of his suit.

[02/09] SPCA of Upstate New York, Inc. v. American Working Collie Ass'n
In a defamation action brought by a New York SPCA against a Vermont resident, the appellate division's dismissal of the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction is affirmed, where: 1) a defendant's three phone calls and two short visits, totaling less than three hours, in addition to the donation of cash and leashes, did not constitute purposeful activities related to the asserted cause of action that would justify bringing her before the New York courts; 2) the alleged defamatory statements were not written in or directed to New York; and 3) there was no substantial relationship between the allegedly defamatory statements and the defendants' New York activities.

[02/08] Howard v. Omni Hotels Management Corp.
In a personal injury action after the plaintiff slipped in a bathtub at a hotel: 1) the district court's grant of summary judgment to the bathtub manufacturer is affirmed, where the evidence produced by the plaintiff, both expert and lay opinion, was insufficient to establish any triable issues of fact on his claims of negligence and product liability; and 2) the district court's grant of the plaintiff's motion for a new trial on his allegations against the hotel is reversed, where the undisputed facts supported only one legal conclusion, that the plaintiff would not be able to prevail on his premises liability or negligence theories, because he could not demonstrate the hotel was placed on sufficient actual or constructive notice of any dangerous condition of the bathtub.

Read More