Case Summaries
Insurance Law
[12/30] Food Pro Int'l, Inc. v. Farmers Ins. Exchange
In connection to a tort claim brought by an injured construction worker against plaintiff, judgment in favor of defendant-insurer in plaintiff-insuree's claim for breach of contract and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is reversed where: 1) there was no merit to plaintiff's punitive damages argument; but 2) the trial court erred in finding that defendant-insurer had no duty to defend plaintiff.
[12/29] Sanders v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am.
Insurance company correctly deducted claimant's social security disability payments from the amount owed him under long-term disability insurance. Although his SSDI payments arose from his inability to work due to mental illness, while his long-term disability payments arose from his inability to work due to physical impairments, his inability to work constituted a single disability with both mental and physical causes.
[12/24] McCauley v. First Unum Life Ins. Co.
In a challenge to defendent-insurer's denial of plaintiff's claim for long-term disability benefits, dismissal of plaintiff's complaint is reversed and remanded where: 1) in light of the Supreme Court decision in Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Glenn, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) plan administrator abused its discretion in denying plaintiff's claim; 2) the administrator had a conflict of interest because it had both the discretionary authority to determine the validity of the employee's claim and paid the benefits under the policy; 3) a reasonable trier of fact would conclude that defendant-insurer's denial of long-term disability was arbitrary and capricious; and 4) plaintiff was entitled to benefits and interest running from September 18, 1995, the date on which defendant-insurer rejected plaintiff's appeal.
More...
Commercial Law
[12/31] Gen. Store, Inc. v. Van Loan
Revocation of a federal firearms dealer license for willful violations of federal and state firearms laws is affirmed. A violation of the Gun Control Act requires a willful violation that is "a deliberate, knowing, or reckless violation of its requirements," and both of plaintiff's violations satisfied this standard.
[12/31] US Motors v. Gen. Motors Europe
District court correctly dismissed this case, brought by domestic and foreign plaintiffs against a foreign defendant, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The presence of foreign parties on both sides of the dispute destroyed the complete diversity required by 28 U.S.C. section 1332(a)(2).
[12/30] In re: Marshall
Balance transfers from one credit card to another, made by debtors during the ninety-day period prior to the filing of their Chapter 7 petition, are preferential transfers under 11 U.S.C. section 547(b). Such payments constitute transfers of "an interest of the Debtor in property," because the debtor exercises control over the loaned proceeds even if he is never in actual possession of them, and such transactions deplete the bankruptcy estate.
More...
|
