<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Civil Procedure Law - MoreLaw.com</title>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com</link>
<description>Civil Procedure Law - MoreLaw.com</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>&#169; Copyright 2008, MoreLaw.com Inc All Rights Reserved.</copyright>
<category>Recent Cases</category>
<item>
<title>Robin L. Pepper v. Routh Crabtree, P.C., et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=S-13042&amp;s=AK&amp;d=42050</link>
<description>Robin Pepper sued an Anchorage debt collection agency and its lawyers, claiming that they violated Alaskas Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act (UTPA) when they: (1) sued Pepper in state district court without first sending a written demand, (2) misrepresented to the court that Pepper was competent, and (3) applied for default judgment without first informing Peppers attorney. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Robert Davis v. Ford Motor Credit Company</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=B204047&amp;s=CA&amp;d=42042</link>
<description>Plaintiff and appellant Robert Davis (Davis) appeals a judgment of dismissal following the sustaining without leave to amend of a demurrer interposed by defendant and appellant Ford Motor Credit Company LLC (Ford) to Daviss original complaint.Ford also appeals, seeking review of a postjudgment order denying its motion for attorney fees.This litigation relates to Fords billing practices u</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Deana Dowell, et al. v. Biosense Webster, Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=B201439&amp;s=CA&amp;d=42041</link>
<description>Plaintiffs and Appellants St. Jude Medical S.C., Inc. (SC) and Pacesetter, Inc. (Pacesetter) (collectively, St. Jude), along with employees Deana Dowell, Steven Chapman and Claudio Plaza, sued Defendant and Cross-appellant Biosense Webster, Inc. (Biosense) to enjoin it from enforcing noncompete and nonsolicitation clauses in employment agreements used in California, including agreements it had wit</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Martin Kelley v. CB&amp;I Constructors, Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=B205735&amp;s=CA&amp;d=42040</link>
<description>A jury found that defendant CB&amp;I Constructors, Inc. (defendant) negligently sparked a brush fire that caused significant damage to a ranch (the property) owned by plaintiff Martin Kelly (plaintiff). Because plaintiff had a personal reason to restore the property, the jury awarded plaintiff substantially more in damages to restore the property than the property was worth immediately before the fire</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Barbara Brown  v.  J.B. Hunt Transport Services</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-3803&amp;s=AR&amp;d=42018</link>
<description>Barbara Brown (Brown) hurt her knee while working as a truck driver for J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. (Hunt). Prudential Insurance Company of America (Prudential), which insured Hunts employee welfare benefits plan (Plan), discontinued Browns long-term disability (LTD) benefits and ignored her requests for information about its decision. Brown sued Hunt and Prudential under ERISA1 for r</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Reggie White  v.  National Football League</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-2001&amp;s=&amp;d=42013</link>
<description>Since the entry of a 1993 consent decree, the district court1 has overseen the enforcement of a settlement in an antitrust class action brought by the above-named class members against the National Football League and its member clubs (NFL or League). Throughout that time, the district court has resolved numerous disputes over the terms of the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement (settlement agree</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Roy L. Denton v. Steve Rievley</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-6406&amp;s=TN&amp;d=42009</link>
<description>In this lawsuit alleging violations of 42 U.S.C.  1983, Appellant Steve Rievley, a Dayton City police officer, appeals the denial of his motion for summary judgment on claims made by Appellee Roy Denton. Rievley claims that he should have been granted summary judgment on Dentons warrantless arrest claim because he is entitled to qualified immunity. WeAFFIRM.I. BACKGROUNDA. Factual backg</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Stacey Ledbetter v. Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=05-08-00966-CV&amp;s=TX&amp;d=41981</link>
<description>In this forcible detainer case, Stacey Ledbetter appeals the trial court's judgment in favor of Fannie Mae, also known as the Federal National Mortgage Association. In one issue, Ledbetter asserts the trial court erred by granting possession of the premises to Fannie Mae because Fannie Mae's petition did not comply with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 741. Specifically, Ledbetter argues Fannie Mae's</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Doris Penrod v. David R. Schecter, M.D., Individually and d/b/a Schecter and Blumenfeld, P.A.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-07-00121-CV&amp;s=TX&amp;d=41980</link>
<description> Is it reversible error to permit a jury to decide a case based on an instruction that is neither supported by the evidence, intended by the trial court, nor properly defined? Because we conclude that it is, we reverse and remand.FACTUAL SUMMARYDoris Penrod appeals from a take nothing judgment entered in favor of David R. Schecter, M.D., Individually, and d/b/a Schecter and Blumenfeld, P.A., follo</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Debbie Hunter v. Ford Motor Company, Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=10-08-00128-CV&amp;s=TX&amp;d=41977</link>
<description>In this products-liability action, Appellants Debbie Hunter et al. (the Hunters) appeal a take-nothing judgment, raising three issues.  We will affirm.Background            Bob Hunter was killed in a post-collision fire that occurred after the 1999 Ford F-350 diesel pickup truck he was driving collided nearly head-on with a Toyota pickup truck.  The Toyotas driver was killed instantly.  Bob</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Dianne Bond v. Edwin Utreras</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=07-2651&amp;s=IL&amp;d=42012</link>
<description>Diane Bond sued the City of Chicago and several members of its police department, claiming that the officers violated her constitutional rights while performing official duties. During discovery, the City turned over voluminous material relating to citizen complaints against its police officers; the information was subject to a protective order that prohibited public disclosure of these confidenti</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Nader Automotive Group, LLC, et al. v. New Motor Vehicle Board, Volkswagen of America, Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=C059144&amp;s=CA&amp;d=41959</link>
<description>In these two consolidated cases, plaintiffs Nader Automotive Group, LLC, and its general manager, Nader Eghtesad, (collectively Nader) protested Naders termination as franchised dealers of Volkswagen of America, Inc., and Audi of America, Inc., the real parties in interest. The New Motor Vehicle Board (board) dismissed the protests based on Naders failure to comply with authorized discovery </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>George Louie v. BFS Retail and Commercial Operations, L.L.C.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=C059800&amp;s=CA&amp;d=41957</link>
<description>Plaintiff George Louie seeks damages against defendant BFS Retail and Commercial Operations, LLC (BFRC) for alleged violation of Californias Disabled Persons Act (Civ. Code,  54 et seq.1 (DPA)), because the countertops in BFRCs business establishments were allegedly too high to allow wheelchair access. The trial court entered judgment of dismissal upon BFRCs demurrer, concluding res jud</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Jan Lubin v. Farmers Group, Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=03-03-00374-CV&amp;s=&amp;d=41954</link>
<description>The issue in this interlocutory appeal is whether the class action filed by the attorney general in this case was properly certified. Under former article 21.21, section 17 of the insurance code, the Department of Insurance (the "Department") may ask the attorney general to institute a class-action lawsuit to recover from an insurer damages for injuries done to the insurance-buying public. See for</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Gary Lundgren v. City of Wasilla</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=S-13108&amp;s=AK&amp;d=42053</link>
<description>A landowner challenged a municipalitys delay in replatting and providing an accurate legal description of the land it took using its power of eminent domain, alleging that it unnecessarily interfered with his remainder property rights. As a remedy the landowner requested that the superior court dismiss the previously approved taking without prejudice or, alternatively, change the valuation date</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 6 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Roy L. Evans, et al. v. Lasco Bathware, Inc., et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=D053731&amp;s=CA&amp;d=41961</link>
<description>Plaintiffs Roy Evans and Arthea LaFrades (together plaintiffs) each owned homes in which shower pans manufactured by defendant Lasco Bathware, Inc. (Lasco) were installed. Plaintiffs' action against Lasco alleged the shower pans suffered from design defects that resulted in water leakage, and the leakage caused damage to adjacent building components. Plaintiffs' fourth amended complaint (FAC), sty</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 6 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Memphis Biofuels, L.L.C. v. Chickasaw National Industries, Inc.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-6145&amp;s=&amp;d=41907</link>
<description>Plaintiff-Appellant Memphis Biofuels, LLC appeals the dismissal of its suit against Defendant-Appellee Chickasaw Nation Industries, Inc. for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Because we agree with the district court that Chickasaw Nation Industries, Inc. enjoys tribal-sovereign immunity, we AFFIRM.I. BACKGROUNDMemphis Biofuels, LLC (MBF) is a biodiesel refining company incorporated in</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 6 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Perlan Therapeutics, Inc. v. Nexbio, Inc., et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=G042205&amp;s=CA&amp;d=41962</link>
<description>Code of Civil Procedure section 2019.2101 requires a plaintiff suing for misappropriation of its trade secrets to identify with reasonable particularity the purported trade secrets which allegedly have been misappropriated before commencing discovery relating to the trade secret[s.] The court below concluded plaintiff Perlan Therapeutics, Inc.s effort to meet this obligation fell sh</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Charles Crihfield v. Steven Brown and the Home Show, L.L.C.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=34593&amp;s=WV&amp;d=41896</link>
<description>This case is before the Court upon the appeal of an Order denying the Appellant's, Charles Crihfield's, Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment entered by the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia, on April 15, 2008. In the Order, the circuit court directed that the parties within thirty (30) days of entry of this Order, mutually agree on an arbitrator to hear the dispute in question[,]</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Howard Wrenn v. the West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of Highways</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=34717&amp;s=WV&amp;d=41895</link>
<description> This case is before this Court upon an appeal from a final order of the Circuit Court of Wyoming County, West Virginia, granting a motion to dismiss filed by the Appellee and Defendant below, the West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of Highways (hereinafter called DOH). In that Order, the circuit court concluded that the DOH is entitled to sovereign immunity in this case bec</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Ford Motor Credit Company v. Nicole Perrell, et al.</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=1336%20September%20Term,%202008&amp;s=MD&amp;d=41949</link>
<description>John and Sarah Shumaker, appellees,1 filed a class action complaint in the Circuit Court for Howard County against Ford Motor Credit Company (FMC), appellant, for alleged violations of the following statutes: 1) Marylands Credit Grantor Closed End Provisions (CLEC), Md. Code (1975, 2005 Repl. Vol.), Commercial Law Article (CL)  12-1001 et seq.; 2) Marylands Consumer Pro</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 2 Nov 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Larry Groover v. Scottsdale Insurance Company</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-31051&amp;s=LA&amp;d=41843</link>
<description>Larry Groover and the guardians of decedent Chad Groovers minor children (collectively the Groovers) appeal the district courts summary judgment order dismissing their tort claims against Omni Pinnacle, LLC (Omni) and Cahaba Disaster Recovery, LLC (Cahaba). Because we hold that the Louisiana workers compensation scheme shielded Omni and Cahaba from tort liability, we affirm.IShortly</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Nancy J. Hillstrand v. City of Homer</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=C-13160&amp;s=AK&amp;d=42054</link>
<description>A municipality sought land through eminent domain to expand its water treatment plant. The property owner objected to the taking because: it would close off an access route to her remaining property; the municipality had not dedicated replacement access in a binding way; and the municipality sought a fee simple interest, rather than an easement, in the portion of the land to be used as an undevelo</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Mary Kathryn Brown v. City of Pittsburgh</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=08-1819&amp;s=PA&amp;d=41934</link>
<description>This case requires us to delineate, in a quite literal sense, the boundaries of the First Amendments protection of speech. In response to concerns about aggressive protests and confrontations at health care facilities providing abortions, the City of Pittsburgh enacted Ordinance No. 49 in December 2005. Pittsburgh, Pa., Code tit. 6,  623.01623.07. The Ordinance established two different </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Westchester Fire Insurance Company v. Phil Mendez</title>
<author>kent@morelaw.com (Kent Morlan)</author>
<link>http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=07-17383&amp;s=NV&amp;d=41840</link>
<description>Westchester Fire Insurance Company brought a declaratory relief action against Phil Mendez, its insured policyholder under a commercial general liability insurance policy. Westchester contended that it had no obligation to defend or indemnify Mendez against a certain claim because he failed to give proper notice to the insurance company of the claim.The injured party, Northwest Airlines, whose a</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 CST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel></rss>

