Florida Lawyer News Services | Robbins Equitas

(Tampa dui attorney) Awuah v. Coverall North America, Inc.

More info…
(U.S. 1st Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Labor & Employment Law) In a dispute over whether a dispute over the validity of an arbitration agreement should be decided by a court or by an arbitrator, a district court ruling refusing to order the matter to arbitration is affirmed where, although the circuit court took a narrower view of the district court’s initial role when deciding such a question, plaintiffs were entitled to a ruling by the district court as to whether the arbitration remedy in this case was illusory.

Cmty. Youth Athletic Ctr. v. City of Nat’l City

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Property Law & Real Estate) In a “reverse validation” action filed by plaintiff-non-profit center to challenge the validity of an ordinance that amended a 1995 redevelopment plan enacted by defendant-city, grant of motion for judgment on the pleadings in favor of defendant is reversed where: 1) the trial court used an incorrect legal standard and abused its discretion in failing to find there was good cause for relief from noncompliance with the publication requirements; and 2) the court should have allowed leave to republish the summons.

Carter v. Welles-Bowen Realty, Inc.

(U.S. 6th Cir., Civil Procedure, Government Law, Property Law & Real Estate) In a suit alleging that a title company violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act’s anti-kickback and anti-fee-splitting provisions, dismissal for lack of standing is reversed where the plain meaning of the statutory language and the authorities examined by the court indicate that Congress created a private right of action to impose damages where kickbacks and unearned fees have occurred, even where there is no overcharge.

estate attorney tampa

(St petersburg lawyer) Wilchombe v. Teevee Toons, Inc.

More info…
(U.S. 11th Cir., Civil Procedure, Copyright, Entertainment Law, Intellectual Property) In a copyright infringement case involving the rap song “The Weedman” which appears on a Lil John album “Kings of Crunk”, dismissal of plaintiff-musician’s claim for breach of fiduciary duty is affirmed where: 1) the amended complaint failed to allege a fiduciary relationship and thus failed to state a claim for relief; and 2) plaintiff could not the grant of summary judgment based on arguments raised for the first time in his motion for reconsideration.

In re TS Tech USA Corp.

(U.S. Fed. Cir., Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent, Transportation) In a patent infringement action relating to pivotally attached vehicle headrest assemblies, petition for writ of mandamus to vacate decision denying petitioner’s motion to transfer venue and to direct district court to transfer case to another state is granted where: 1) petitioner met its difficult burden of establishing that the district court clearly abused its discretion in denying transfer of venue to the Southern District of Ohio; and 2) mandamus relief was appropriate.

Coyne’s
&
Co., Inc. v. Enesco, LLC

(U.S. 8th Cir., Commercial Law, Contracts, Copyright, Injury And Tort Law, Intellectual Property, Trade Secrets, Trademark) In a suit related to the early termination of a distributor agreement, denial of a preliminary injunction is affirmed where plaintiff could not demonstrate a likelihood of success on its claims since the distributor agreement was no longer in effect, and defendant’s termination of the agreement did not fall under the Minnesota Franchise Act’s termination requirements since plaintiff had never paid defendant a franchise fee.

Sundance, Inc. v. Demonte Fabricating Ltd.

(U.S. Fed. Cir., Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent) In a patent infringement action, grant of plaintiff’s motion judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) finding the patent was not invalid is reversed where: 1) the district court’s denial of a motion in limine to exclude the testimony of witness, not skilled in the pertinent art, was an abuse of discretion; and 2) as a matter of law, claim 1 of the patent was invalid for obviousness.

Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp.

(U.S. Fed. Cir., Drugs & Biotech, Health Law, Intellectual Property, Patent) In a patent case involving a drug-eluting expandable stent with a coating that has a non-thrombogenic surface, denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial and judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) following a jury verdict of infringement of a patent claim is reversed where the district court erred as a matter of law in failing to hold the patent at issue to have been obvious.

tampa florida lawyer

(Clearwater lawyer) Stearn v. County San Bernardino

More info…
(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Government Law, Property Law & Real Estate) In plaintiff’s challenge to defendant-county for its approval of 14 conditional use permits sought by respondent-real party interest to erect billboards, judgment of dismissal in favor of defendant-county is reversed where: 1) the trial court erred in dismissing the fourth cause of action for administrative mandamus under Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5; 2) the expedited judicial review provided by section 1094.8 was available only when the license applicant or the issuing public agency filed an action challenging the grant or denial of a license for expressive conduct, not when a third party did so; and 3) the court disagreed with respondent’s main alternate ground for dismissal that plaintiff must wait to challenge the Board’s rezoning actions and permitting of the billboards.

Cmty. Youth Athletic Ctr. v. City of Nat’l City

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Property Law & Real Estate) In a “reverse validation” action filed by plaintiff-non-profit center to challenge the validity of an ordinance that amended a 1995 redevelopment plan enacted by defendant-city, grant of motion for judgment on the pleadings in favor of defendant is reversed where: 1) the trial court used an incorrect legal standard and abused its discretion in failing to find there was good cause for relief from noncompliance with the publication requirements; and 2) the court should have allowed leave to republish the summons.

Pennington v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

(U.S. 6th Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Injury And Tort Law, Insurance Law) A motion to certify a question to the Kentucky Supreme Court over whether an insurance company may charge a greater underinsured motorist insurance premium based on the number of drivers on a policy without being liable for multiple UIM coverage units is denied, and the judgment of the district court in favor of the insurance company is affirmed, where: 1) although the legal question is one of first impression under Kentucky law, the relevant caselaw addressing UIM premiums and stacking provides sufficient guidance; 2) per-driver policies are distinguishable from per-vehicle policies for stacking purposes; and 3) the UIM policy in question did not expose the insurance company to stacking since the price of the premium was justified by the increased risk that the insurer incurred by providing UIM coverage to multiple drivers.

Thomas
&
Wong Gen. Contractor v. The Lake Bank, N.A.

(U.S. 8th Cir., Banking Law, Civil Procedure) In a suit for failure to perform under a collateral transfer agreement, summary judgment for defendant is reversed and remanded where the suit is not barred by Minnesota’s credit-agreement statute of frauds since, although the collateral transfer agreement was an agreement to make a financial accommodation and therefore a credit agreement, plaintiff was not a debtor with respect to the agreement.

Fitzgerald v. Barnstable Sch.Comm’n

(U.S.S.C., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Education Law, Government Law) Title IX does not preclude an action under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 alleging unconstitutional gender discrimination in schools.

tampa attorney

(Attorney in tampa) Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. King Mountain Tobacco Co., Inc.

More info…
(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Procedure, Cyberspace Law, Indian Law, Intellectual Property, Trademark) In a suit alleging trademark violations against a tribal corporation for cigarette packages, the district court’s grant of a stay while the tribal court determined its jurisdiction is reversed where the tribal court does not have colorable jurisdiction over plaintiff-nonmember’s federal and state claims for trademark infringement on the Internet and beyond the reservation.

Intervest Constr., Inc. v. Canterbury Estate Homes, Inc.

(U.S. 11th Cir., Construction, Copyright, Intellectual Property, Property Law & Real Estate) In a copyright infringement action alleging that district court erred in its examination of the two-floor plan at issue, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where: 1) the floor plans at issue were protected by compilation copyrights which were “thin”; and 2) the district court correctly determined that the differences in the protectable expression were so significant that, as a matter of law, no reasonable properly-instructed jury of lay observers could find the works substantially similar.

tampa personal injury attorney