The Law Lady. For more info about us, click here. To be added to our email circulation with MUCH more law, click here and specify whether you wish to be added to our CRIMINAL, CIVIL or HEALTH & INSURANCE Recent Decisions of Interest.
Showing posts with label health care reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care reform. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
Constitutional law, habeas corpus, insurance coverage, health care reform, and fresh summer squash sauteed in rosemary-sage butter
Attorney's fees -- Prevailing party -- Award of fees is
reversed where final judgment entered in favor of the prevailing parties was
reversed
BLACK
DIAMOND PROPERTIES, INC., BLACK DIAMOND REALTY, INC., AND STANLEY C. OLSEN,
Appellants, v. CHARLES S. HAINES, KATHY HAINES, RICHARD O. CONBOY, JACKSON
RANDOLPH, LARRY LAUKKA, ANGELO MASUT, BRENDA MASUT AND TOM HOWELL, Appellees.
5th District.
Bankruptcy -- Chapter 11 -- Confirmation of plan -- Debtors
may not obtain confirmation of Chapter 11 cramdown plan that provides for sale
of collateral free and clear of creditor's lien but does not permit creditor to
“credit-bid” at the sale
RADLAX GATEWAY HOTEL, LLC, et al., Petitioners v.
AMALGAMATED BANK. U.S. Supreme Court.
Dissolution of marriage -- It was error to require both
parties to obtain life insurance to secure child support where such relief was
not requested, and where court made no findings that special circumstances
justified requirement and no findings regarding insurability, cost of
insurance, or ability to afford insurance -- Court erred in finding that child
could not be home schooled where child would not reach kindergarten age until
twenty months after date of final judgment -- It is improper to determine best
interest of child prospectively
STEVEN EDWARD EISELE, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. HEIDI
MARIE EISELE, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. 2nd District.
Iranian Investments: CALIFORNIA MEASURE SEEKS TO BAN
INSURERS' INVESTMENTS IN IRAN, 8 No. 2 Westlaw Journal Insurance Bad Faith 9,
Westlaw Journal Insurance Bad Faith May 29, 2012 The California Insurance
Commission has passed an initiative over opposition from insurance companies
and associations, that seeks to restrict insurers from investing state
residents' premiums in entities involved with building Iran's nuclear sector or
developing the country's petroleum or natural gas. Although State Farm Insurance
Co. and insurance industry trade organizations registered their opposition to
Assembly Bill 2160, the measure passed after a committee hearing May 2.
Health Care Reform: NOTRE DAME, CATHOLIC GROUPS SUE TO BLOCK
CONTRACEPTION MANDATE, Univ. of Notre Dame v. Sebelius, 22 No. 34 Westlaw
Journal Insurance Coverage 3, Westlaw Journal Insurance Coverage June 1, 2012
May 21 (Reuters) - The University of Notre Dame and dozens of other Catholic
institutions have sued the Obama administration to block a government
regulation that requires employers to provide health insurance coverage for
contraceptives to employees. The regulation, which is part of the president's
health care reform law, has sparked a nasty fight between the administration
and the Roman Catholic Church, which opposes artificial contraception. Some 43
Catholic groups have sued.
Professional Services Exclusion: PROPERTY MANAGER GETS NO
COVERAGE FOR FATAL APARTMENT FIRE, Golden Eagle Ins. Corp. v. Lemoore Real
Estate & Prop. Mgmt., 22 No. 34 Westlaw Journal Insurance Coverage 4, Westlaw
Journal Insurance Coverage June 1, 2012 A property manager will get no coverage
for a $29 million judgment in wrongful-death suits stemming from an apartment
complex fire that killed five people, a California appeals court has ruled. The
5th District Court of Appeal held that the professional services exclusion in
Lemoore Real Estate & Property Management Inc.'s business liability policy
with Golden Eagle Insurance Corp. precluded coverage for the judgment.
Duty to Defend: HOMEBUILDER HAD RIGHT TO
CONTROL ITS DEFENSE IN DEFECT SUITS, Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. v. Centex Homes,
22 No. 34 Westlaw Journal Insurance Coverage 9, Westlaw Journal Insurance
Coverage June 1, 2012 Homebuilding giant Centex Homes claimed the right to
control its legal defense when its insurer, Travelers Property Casualty Company
of America, stalled in defending it in a pair of construction defect lawsuits,
a California federal judge has ruled. "As the duty to defend arises
immediately upon tender, Travelers' delay in providing Centex with a defense
divested it the insurer of the right to control that defense," U.S.
District Judge Samuel Conti of the Northern District of California said.
Criminal law -- Sentencing -- Holding of United States
Supreme Court in Graham v. Florida that the Eighth Amendment prohibits life
sentences without the possibility of parole for juveniles convicted of
nonhomicide crimes does not prohibit imposition of seventy-year sentence on
fourteen-year-old juvenile defendant convicted of attempted first-degree murder
-- Question certified
SHIMEEK GRIDINE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
1st District.
Criminal law -- Trafficking in cocaine -- Habeas corpus --
Claim that section 893.13, as amended by section 893.101, is facially
unconstitutional because it eliminates all mens rea from drug statute should
have been raised on direct appeal or in post conviction proceedings, rather
than in habeas petition -- Assuming trial court deemed habeas petition a rule
3.850 motion, trial court correctly determined it would be time-barred and
declined to transfer it to sentencing court where relief was sought four years
after judgment and sentence became final
MALCOLM D. DELANCY, JR., Appellant,
v. KENNETH S. TUCKER, Secretary, Department of Corrections, Appellee. 1st District.
The Law Lady. For more info about us, click here. To be added to our email circulation with MUCH more law, click here and specify whether you wish to be added to our CRIMINAL, CIVIL or HEALTH & INSURANCE Recent Decisions of Interest.
Friday, May 25, 2012
Health law appeals, bad faith insurance, medical malpractice and roasted chicken and garlic with sage-butter wild potatoes
Insurance
-- Bad faith -- Jurisdiction -- Removal of state court action to federal court
-- Remand to state court -- Diversity -- Under 28 U.S.C. section 1446(b),
motion to remand bad faith action, which was removed to federal court on the
basis of diversity, is granted where insurer's notice of removal was filed more
than a year after “commencement of the action” -- Argument that action did not
commence until plaintiffs amended complaint to add bad faith claim and
underlying judgment on initial uninsured motorist contract claim became final,
is rejected -- Under law of Florida, where action was originally filed, a civil
action is commenced on date initial compliant is filed -- Further, plain
language of section 1446(b) suggests that “commencement of the action” means
the filing of original complaint that sets in motion resolution of all claims
that may properly disposed of in the action, and addition of a new claim does
not reset one-year limitation period -- Insurer's effort to invoke “separate
and independent” controversy doctrine for invoking federal jurisdiction in
removal action based purely on diversity necessarily fails where judiciary has
been effectively divested of its power to analyze diversity actions under
section 1441(c)
THOMAS A. MOULTROP and PATRICIA GUY
MOULTROP, plaintiffs, v. GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, defendant. U.S.
District Court, Southern District of Florida.
Insurance
-- Property -- Conditions precedent -- Examination under oath -- Error to enter
summary judgment in favor of Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, as
successor in interest for insurer, based on failure of insured and,
subsequently, its assignee to submit to examination under oath where FIGA
failed to plead and prove prejudice -- Moreover, record indicates that FIGA was
not prejudiced
WHISTLER'S PARK, INC., Appellant, v.
THE FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY, ETC., Appellee. 5th District.
Health Care Reform: TAXES LURK BEHIND COURT
TEST OF OBAMA HEALTH LAW, 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 3, Westlaw
Journal Health Law May 24, 2012 WASHINGTON, May 16 (Reuters) - While Supreme
Court watchers focus on the controversial insurance requirement in President
Obama's health care law, lesser known is that the court's upcoming ruling will
also decide the fate of billions of dollars in new taxes. The 2010 law includes
a 3.8 percent boost in taxes on investment income and a 0.9 percent increase in
the Medicare payroll tax, both hitting people who earn more than $200,000 a
year.
Health
Care Reform: U.S. SETS DEADLINE FOR PROPOSALS ON STATE HEALTH CARE EXCHANGES,
20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 4, Westlaw Journal Health Law May 24, 2012
WASHINGTON, May 16 (Reuters) - The Obama administration forged ahead with
health care reforms, announcing a Nov. 16 deadline for state governments to
submit proposals showing how they intend to operate health insurance exchanges
in 2014. The Department of Health and Human Services released a detailed
blueprint of the legal and operational requirements states must meet in their
proposals if they expect to win federal approval to begin operating regulated
insurance markets, in whole or in part.
Health
Care Reform/Health Exchanges: NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR VETOES HEALTH EXCHANGE BILL,
CALLS IT 'PREMATURE', 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 5, Westlaw Journal
Health Law May 24, 2012 Rejecting a key provision of President Obama's health
care overhaul law, Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has vetoed a
measure that would have set up a health insurance exchange in the state. The
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 111-148, requires most
Americans to carry health insurance by 2014 or face a fine. To help consumers
meet this mandate, the law calls for states to establish "health
exchanges," an online marketplace that would give small employers
Health
Care Reform/Medicaid Service Fees: HHS PROPOSES PAY BOOST FOR MEDICAID DOCTORS,
20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 6, Westlaw Journal Health Law May 24, 2012
Primary care physicians could see a pay raise in the next two years for treating
Medicaid patients under a rule proposed May 9 by the Obama administration. The
Department of Health and Human Services said the increase would bring service
fees for Medicaid primary care in line with those paid by Medicare. Under the
rule, physicians would see a 34 percent increase in average Medicaid primary
care payments, according to the HHS.
Veterans
Health Benefits: VETS LOSE SUIT ON MENTAL HEALTH CARE, Veterans for Common
Sense v. Shinseki, 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 7, Westlaw Journal
Health Law May 24, 2012 Courts cannot order the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs to overhaul the way it cares for the treatment of military veterans
with combat-related illnesses, a federal appeals court has ruled. The full 9th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said allegations of systemic delays and neglect
in mental health care for veterans is something Congress, not the courts, needs
to address.In a 10-1 decision, the appellate court reversed a prior 2-1 ruling
by a 9th Circuit panel.
Reproductive
Rights/Legislation: ARIZONA BANS FUNDING FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD, OTHER ABORTION
PROVIDERS, 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 8, Westlaw Journal Health Law
May 24, 2012 Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, R, has signed a bill that bans Planned
Parenthood and other family planning organizations that perform abortions from
receiving public funds. Signed into law May 4, House Bill 2800 excludes cases
in which a clinic needs to perform an abortion in order to save the life of the
mother or if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest. The
legislation applies to any health care provider that is eligible for federal
funding under 42 U.S.C. 1396d(1)(2)(B)
Reproductive
Rights: JUDGE STOPS TEXAS FROM BARRING PLANNED PARENTHOOD FROM HEALTH PROGRAM,
Planned Parenthood Ass'n of Hidalgo County v. Suehs, 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal
Health Law 9, Westlaw Journal Health Law May 24, 2012 A federal judge has
temporarily blocked the state of Texas from excluding Planned Parenthood
clinics from participating in the government-funded Women's Health Program
because the organization provides abortions. The state's Health and Human
Services Commission initiated a rule last year barring it from contracting with
entities affiliated with abortion providers.Putting the state rule on hold
until he can hear full arguments in the case.
Medical
Devices/Patents: CORDIS TO APPEAL $40 MILLION JUDGMENT IN STENT PATENT CASE,
Boston Scientific Corp. v. Cordis Corp., 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law
10, Westlaw Journal Health Law May 24, 2012 Cordis Corp. has filed a notice of
appeal in response to a $40 million judgment entered in favor of Boston
Scientific Corp. after a Delaware federal judge doubled a jury verdict in a
stent design patent dispute. U.S. District Judge Sue L. Robinson of the
District of Delaware issued the enhanced damages order March 13, saying the
doubling of the jury's $19.5 million award was "reasonable under the
circumstances."She denied Cordis' motion for judgment as a matter of law
Medical
Malpractice: CALIFORNIA JURY AWARDS $74.5 MILLION FOR GIRL'S BIRTH INJURIES,
Blunt v. Haupt, 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 11, Westlaw Journal Health
Law May 24, 2012 A California jury has awarded $74.5 million to the parents of
a 3-year-old girl who suffers from cerebral palsy allegedly caused by an
obstetrician's negligence during her birth. The San Luis Obispo County Superior
Court jury awarded $53 million in future medical expenses for Jennifer and
Andrew Blunt's daughter Sofia, in addition to $21.5 million in damages for
emotional distress, future lost wages and noneconomic damages. The verdict is
thought to be one of the largest in California history.
Nursing
Homes: CLASS ACTION ALLEGES INADEQUATE STAFFING AT CALIFORNIA NURSING HOMES, Mingura
v. HCR ManorCare, 20 No. 1 Westlaw Journal Health Law 12, Westlaw Journal
Health Law May 24, 2012 Nursing home chain HCR ManorCare lured elderly and
dependent adults to enter its facilities in California by concealing that they
regularly fell below the "bare minimum" staffing requirements, a
class-action lawsuit alleges. Plaintiff Rebeca Mingura says the company
violated state health and consumer protection laws by failing to provide
adequate staff to fulfill the legal minimum amount of direct nursing care to
each patient.
Torts
-- Nursing homes -- Jurisdiction -- Non-residents -- Action against
non-resident defendants who had ownership interests in entities that owned and
operated Florida nursing homes -- Circuit court erred in finding that it had personal
jurisdiction over defendants where, although plaintiff established defendants'
ownership interests in nursing home's operating and management companies,
plaintiff failed to establish any connexity between defendants' financial
interests and alleged abuse from which plaintiff's claims arise, and failed to
show that defendants have sufficient minimum contacts -- Plaintiff failed to
demonstrate that defendants had control over day-to-day operations of nursing
home sufficient to establish agency relationship where affidavit provided by
plaintiff established nothing more than defendants' ownership interest --
Ownership interest, without more, is insufficient to establish personal
jurisdiction over non-resident defendants
HARRIS
SCHWARTZBERG; HARRIS SCHWARTZBERG TRUST; STEVEN SCHWARTZBERG TRUST; JUDITH
SCHWARTZBERG TRUST; SCHWARTZBERG DESCENDANTS TRUST; HARRIS SCHWARTZBERG 2003
TRUST; STEVEN SCHWARTZBERG 2003 TRUST; HS MIDWEST TRUST #1; JS MIDWEST TRUST;
FAM MIDWEST TRUST; JUDITH SCHWARTZBERG 2003 TRUST; HARRIS SCHWARTZBERG 2004 GST
TRUST 1; HARRIS SCHWARTZBERG 2004 GST TRUST 2; JUDITH SCHWARTZBERG 2004 GST
TRUST 1; JUDITH SCHWARTZBERG 2004 GST TRUST 2; SCHWARTZBERG FAMILY 2004 GST
TRUST; SCHWARTZBERG 2004 DESCENDANTS TRUST; JS NATIONAL TRUST; HS NATIONAL TRUST
#1; HS NATIONAL TRUST #2; FAM NATIONAL TRUST; and MAXWELL STOLZBERG,
Appellants, v. KIM K. KNOBLOCH, as Personal Representative of the Estate of
William Knobloch, Deceased, Appellee. 2nd District.
The Law Lady. For more info about us, click here. To be added to our email circulation with MUCH more law, click here and specify whether you wish to be added to our CRIMINAL, CIVIL or HEALTH & INSURANCE Recent Decisions of Interest.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
House kills health law provision - from The Boston Globe
House kills health law provision - The Boston Globe
"The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to repeal an unpopular tax filing requirement for businesses tucked into the new health care law.
"The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to repeal an unpopular tax filing requirement for businesses tucked into the new health care law.
The provision would require millions of businesses to file tax forms for every vendor that sells them more than $600 in goods each year, starting in 2012. The requirement is projected to raise nearly $25 billion over the next decade by ensuring that vendors pay their taxes. But lawmakers in both parties say it could create a paperwork nightmare for businesses and the Internal Revenue Service." More
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Tricked or treated, we got some things good and heated
Criminal law -- Habeas corpus -- Murder -- Death penalty -- Counsel -- Ineffectiveness -- Sentencing phase of capital trial -- Failure to investigate and present mitigating evidence concerning petitioner's mental health at time of crime -- State court's determination that petitioner's trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective in preparing for sentencing phase of trial was neither contrary to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law -- Court cannot say that state court unreasonably rejected claim in face of unanimous death-penalty recommendation from jury; finding of four statutory aggravators, including that murder was especially heinous, atrocious and cruel; finding that petitioner was triggerman; petitioner's boasting and detailed statement to a friend; weaknesses highlighted in petitioner's “new” mitigating evidence; and further aggravating evidence that this “new” mitigating evidence may have revealed
GREGORY ALAN KOKAL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents-Appellees. 11th Circuit.
Criminal law -- Medicare fraud -- Conspiracy to defraud United States, to cause submission of false claims, and to pay health care kickbacks -- Conspiracy to commit health care fraud -- Evidence -- Trial court improperly excluded, as hearsay, videotape which arguably showed coconspirators assuring defendant that there was no fraudulent scheme at clinic which employed defendant and which was established as front for massive Medicare scam -- Error was harmless because videotape was duplicative of witness testimony discussing the exculpatory content of videotape, which testimony was stressed by defendant's counsel in closing argument -- District court did not abuse discretion by refusing to exclude evidence that individual who provided funding and personnel necessary to start clinic was once defendant's ex-husband -- Evidence was sufficient to support convictions of both defendants on all counts -- Sentencing -- Reasons given by district court justified sentencing physician-defendant above the guidelines and imposing sentence which was far greater than that imposed on coconspirators who were more deeply involved in fraudulent scheme -- District court did not err in assigning little weight to post-verdict polygraph examinations after finding that evidence that defendant gave perjured testimony was so overwhelming that no polygraph could sway district court's decision to apply obstruction of justice enhancement -- Mandatory Victim Restitution Act -- Term “victim” as used in MVRA includes government -- Amount of loss -- No error in attributing entire loss to defendant-nurse, notwithstanding her argument that she knew clinic was providing medically unnecessary treatment, but there was no evidence that she knew clinic was billing Medicare for infusions that were not provided at all -- Risk of death or serious injury -- No error in applying two-level enhancement based on finding that nurse-defendant's offense involved “conscious or reckless risk of death or serious bodily injury”
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SANDRA MATEOS, ANA ALVAREZ, Defendants-Appellants. 11th Circuit.
Medicaid Cuts: LA. CLASS ACTION CHALLENGES REDUCTION OF MEDICAID HOME-CARE SERVICES, Pitts v. Greenstein, 13 No. 9 Westlaw Journal Nursing Home 1, Westlaw Journal Nursing Home October 22, 2010
A class of disabled Medicaid recipients in Louisiana has alleged the state health department's plan to reduce benefits for home-based care violates federal disability law and might unnecessarily force thousands into nursing homes. Lead plaintiffs Helen Pitts and Kenneth Roman asked the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana to grant preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining the state's Department of Health and Hospitals from denying long-term personal-care services.
Health Care Reform: STATES GET $49 MILLION TO BUILD INSURANCE EXCHANGES, 13 No. 9 Westlaw Journal Nursing Home 6, Westlaw Journal Nursing Home October 22, 2010
The federal government has awarded $49 million in grants to 48 states and the District of Columbia to help them research and develop health insurance exchanges aimed at helping consumers shop for coverage. The state-based exchanges will make buying health insurance easier by providing eligible consumers and small businesses "one-stop shopping" where they can compare and purchase health insurance coverage, according a Sept. 30 statement released by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Health Care Reform: DOCTOR-OWNED HOSPITALS URGE COURT TO STRIKE BAN ON NEW FACILITIES, Physician Hosps. of Am. v. Sebelius, 13 No. 9 Westlaw Journal Nursing Home 7, Westlaw Journal Nursing Home October 22, 2010
An industry group representing physician-owned hospitals has asked a federal judge to allow it to proceed with a lawsuit seeking to block part of the new health care reform law that limits the growth and construction of new doctor- owned facilities. Physician Hospitals of America, along with the Texas Spine and Joint Hospital, a 20-bed private facility in Tyler, Texas, are challenging the constitutionality of Section 6001 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act.
Civil rights -- Municipal corporations -- Employment discrimination -- Retaliation -- Title VII -- Error to dismiss Title VII retaliation claim based on determination that factual findings of county personnel board, an independent state agency, were entitled to preclusive effect over the federal action -- District court improperly failed to draw distinction between Title VII and section 1983 with regard to preclusive effects of state administrative proceedings on actions brought thereunder
PATRICK L. BISHOP, SR., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BIRMINGHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT, CITY OF, Defendant, BIRMINGHAM, CITY OF, THE, Defendant-Appellee. 11th Circuit.
Federal jurisdiction -- Torts -- Removal of state court action to federal court -- Timeliness -- Appellate court need not decide whether defendant's notice of removal was timely in instant case because any error in failing to remand case to state court on ground that notice of removal was untimely would be procedural error and would be insufficient to warrant vacating judgment and remanding for new trial in state court where it was undisputed that requirements for diversity jurisdiction were met by time district court entered judgment
BRIAN MOORE, as Personal Representative on behalf of the Estate of Bernard P. Rice, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTH AMERICA SPORTS, INC., a foreign corporation, d.b.a. World Triathlon Corporation, d.b.a. Ironman Triathlon, d.b.a. Ford Ironman Florida, f.k.a. Ironman North America, USA TRIATHLON, a foreign company, Defendants-Appellees. 11th Circuit.
Insurance -- Appraisal -- Error to grant insured's motion to compel appraisal before court resolved underlying coverage dispute -- Conflict certified -- Insurer did not waive right to deny coverage by failing to deny coverage before suit was filed
CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellant, v. MICHIGAN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, Appellee. 4th District.
Insurance -- Homeowners -- Attorney's fees -- Appraisal -- No fees were awardable for portion of case where parties were unable to agree on an umpire, and insurer filed petition for selection of neutral umpire -- Insureds were entitled to award of attorney's fees for successfully defeating insurer's request that trial court direct umpire to provide an itemized appraisal
JOSE ALEJANDRO PINEDA AND MARTHA PINEDA, Appellants/Cross-Appellees, vs. STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. 3rd District.
Insurance -- Homeowners -- Hurricane damage to home -- Attorney's fees -- Insurer's post-suit payment of additional policy proceeds entitles insured to section 627.428 attorney's fees where the insurer wrongfully caused its insured to resort to litigation in order to resolve a conflict with its insurer when it was within the company's power to resolve it -- Error to enter summary judgment for insurer in insured's action against insurer where there were factual issues as to whether insured was forced to file suit to resolve claim under policy
LLOYD BEVERLY and EDITH BEVERLY, Appellants, v. STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 2nd District.
Mortgage foreclosure -- Error to enter final summary judgment of foreclosure where plaintiff failed to file with court the original note, evidence of assignment of mortgage and note, or affidavit of ownership and filed no other admissible evidence establishing plaintiff's status as holder and owner of note and mortgage -- Appellate court unable to determine whether trial court considered copy of original note and affidavit of ownership presented by plaintiff at summary judgment hearing, as these documents were not part of record at time the motion for summary judgment was granted -- Moreover, the documents were not authenticated, filed, and served more than twenty days before hearing, as required by procedural rules
GUISEPPE SERVEDIO a/k/a Joseph Servedio, Appellant, v. US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Indenture Trustee, on behalf of the holders of Terwin Mortgage Trust 2007-AHL1, Asset-Backed Securities Series 2007-AHL1, Appellee. 4th District.
Mortgage foreclosure -- Error to enter summary judgment of foreclosure of commercial mortgage loan where lender accepted a substantial paydown after an initial default and acceleration, and the parties entered into an agreement to reinstate the mortgage after the entry of an earlier judgment -- Summary judgment was improper where there exists a triable issue regarding the reinstatement agreement and the parties' performance under it
ONE 79TH STREET ESTATES, INC. and DARRELL WILSON a/k/a Keith D. Wilson, a single man; PO BOY REALTY INVESTMENT, INC., Appellants, vs. AMERICAN INVESTMENT SERVICES, Appellee. 3rd District.
Mortgage foreclosure -- Receivership -- Trial court erred in allowing receiver to sell mortgaged property, over objection of record owner, before final judgment foreclosing owner's interest in the property -- Contracts -- In absence of statute authorizing court-appointed receiver in foreclosure case to sell mortgaged property before mortgage is foreclosed by final judgment, such authority must be provided in loan agreement between lender and borrower represented by promissory note and mortgage -- Receivership provision in instant case did not purport to give receiver any power of sale of mortgaged property before entry of final foreclosure judgment, but instead explicitly limited receiver's powers to a caretaker role, which included the authority only to operate the property and collect rents -- Under common law, mere appointment of receiver does not itself confer any of the owner's power or authority to sell property -- Finally, recognizing general interim power of a receiver to sell mortgaged property in a foreclosure case would contravene mortgagor's statutory right of redemption
SHUBH HOTELS BOCA, LLC, and ATUL BISARIA, Appellants, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for Mutual Bank (Illinois); and NEIL MERIN, as Court Appointed Receiver for Mortgaged Property, Appellees. 4th District.
Unfair labor practices -- School boards -- Public Employees Relations Commission properly affirmed General Counsel's summary dismissal of teacher's unfair labor practices complaints, where General Counsel found that teacher failed to prove by preponderance of evidence that his protected conduct was a substantial and motivating factor in school principal's retaliatory actions -- There was not sufficient evidence of animus, or relation of adverse events to employee's participation in protected activity, to sustain allegations of unfair labor practices
JUSTIN KOREN, Appellant, vs. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS COMMISSION, Appellees. 3rd District.
Torts -- Action against corporate defendant and county by plaintiff who claimed that she was injured when escalator at airport stopped short, causing her to fall -- Error to enter directed verdicts in favor of defendants on ground that there was insufficient evidence of negligence on their part where plaintiff presented evidence showing that defendants were notified that subject escalator stopped running earlier on the day of plaintiff's fall and there was no evidence that any work was performed on the escalator, allowing jury to reasonably infer that defendants negligently failed to determine what was causing it to stop running and correct the problem -- Jury instructions -- Error to refuse to give jury instruction on negligence per se as to county -- Error to overrule plaintiff's objection to defense closing argument that there was no evidence of prior problems with subject escalator where trial court had excluded such evidence -- Plaintiff's treating physician was not required to be an expert back surgeon in order to testify to his belief that plaintiff would need surgery in the future, and it was error to exclude this testimony -- Accordingly, it was error to deny plaintiff's motion for new trial
BONNIE GREENBERG, Appellant, vs. SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION, ETC., ET AL., Appellees. 3rd District.
Torts -- Civil theft -- Complaint which alleged that plaintiffs made a loan to defendant pursuant to an oral agreement, and that at the time of the loan, defendant had no intention to repay it and/or intended not to repay the funds, stated cause of action for civil theft -- Error to grant defendant's motion for judgment on pleadings -- Allegation that defendant had no intention to repay the funds and/or intended not to repay the funds is sufficient to state claim for common law fraud, and common law fraud is explicitly included in the theft statute -- Economic loss doctrine does not bar statutory claim for civil theft -- There is no merit to defendant's contention that it is impossible to have an action for civil theft where there has been a failure to repay money unless there has been a conversion of a specific fund
WILLIAM P. WALKER, III AND GEMMA M. WALKER, HIS WIFE, Appellants, vs. JAIME A. FIGAROLA, Appellee. 3rd District.
Torts -- Res judicata -- Action by insurance company against attorney who had litigated personal injury protection lawsuits against company on behalf of insureds, alleging claim for restitution and fraud based on monies company paid out in connection with the PIP suits -- Trial court erred in dismissing complaint on ground that it stemmed from PIP lawsuits, and had been previously adjudicated by courts of competent jurisdiction or resolved by settlement agreements -- Application of res judicata was not appropriate because neither the parties nor the cause of action were the same -- Application of collateral estoppel was not appropriate where issues were not the same as those adjudicated in PIP suits
UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, vs. LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL I. LIBMAN, AND MICHAEL I. LIBMAN, ESQUIRE, Appellees 3rd District.
Wrongful death -- Negligent entrustment -- Negligent undertaking -- A defendant cannot be held liable for negligent entrustment or negligent undertaking based on his having taken his alcohol-impaired brother's car keys and then put the keys in a place where his brother easily found them, resulting in his brother causing a fatal collision
GERALD CANTALUPO, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Suzanne Marie Cantalupo, Appellant, v. PAUL J. LEWIS, Appellee. 4th District.
The Law Lady. For more info, go to www.easleyappellate.com
GREGORY ALAN KOKAL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents-Appellees. 11th Circuit.
Criminal law -- Medicare fraud -- Conspiracy to defraud United States, to cause submission of false claims, and to pay health care kickbacks -- Conspiracy to commit health care fraud -- Evidence -- Trial court improperly excluded, as hearsay, videotape which arguably showed coconspirators assuring defendant that there was no fraudulent scheme at clinic which employed defendant and which was established as front for massive Medicare scam -- Error was harmless because videotape was duplicative of witness testimony discussing the exculpatory content of videotape, which testimony was stressed by defendant's counsel in closing argument -- District court did not abuse discretion by refusing to exclude evidence that individual who provided funding and personnel necessary to start clinic was once defendant's ex-husband -- Evidence was sufficient to support convictions of both defendants on all counts -- Sentencing -- Reasons given by district court justified sentencing physician-defendant above the guidelines and imposing sentence which was far greater than that imposed on coconspirators who were more deeply involved in fraudulent scheme -- District court did not err in assigning little weight to post-verdict polygraph examinations after finding that evidence that defendant gave perjured testimony was so overwhelming that no polygraph could sway district court's decision to apply obstruction of justice enhancement -- Mandatory Victim Restitution Act -- Term “victim” as used in MVRA includes government -- Amount of loss -- No error in attributing entire loss to defendant-nurse, notwithstanding her argument that she knew clinic was providing medically unnecessary treatment, but there was no evidence that she knew clinic was billing Medicare for infusions that were not provided at all -- Risk of death or serious injury -- No error in applying two-level enhancement based on finding that nurse-defendant's offense involved “conscious or reckless risk of death or serious bodily injury”
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SANDRA MATEOS, ANA ALVAREZ, Defendants-Appellants. 11th Circuit.
Medicaid Cuts: LA. CLASS ACTION CHALLENGES REDUCTION OF MEDICAID HOME-CARE SERVICES, Pitts v. Greenstein, 13 No. 9 Westlaw Journal Nursing Home 1, Westlaw Journal Nursing Home October 22, 2010
A class of disabled Medicaid recipients in Louisiana has alleged the state health department's plan to reduce benefits for home-based care violates federal disability law and might unnecessarily force thousands into nursing homes. Lead plaintiffs Helen Pitts and Kenneth Roman asked the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana to grant preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining the state's Department of Health and Hospitals from denying long-term personal-care services.
Health Care Reform: STATES GET $49 MILLION TO BUILD INSURANCE EXCHANGES, 13 No. 9 Westlaw Journal Nursing Home 6, Westlaw Journal Nursing Home October 22, 2010
The federal government has awarded $49 million in grants to 48 states and the District of Columbia to help them research and develop health insurance exchanges aimed at helping consumers shop for coverage. The state-based exchanges will make buying health insurance easier by providing eligible consumers and small businesses "one-stop shopping" where they can compare and purchase health insurance coverage, according a Sept. 30 statement released by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Health Care Reform: DOCTOR-OWNED HOSPITALS URGE COURT TO STRIKE BAN ON NEW FACILITIES, Physician Hosps. of Am. v. Sebelius, 13 No. 9 Westlaw Journal Nursing Home 7, Westlaw Journal Nursing Home October 22, 2010
An industry group representing physician-owned hospitals has asked a federal judge to allow it to proceed with a lawsuit seeking to block part of the new health care reform law that limits the growth and construction of new doctor- owned facilities. Physician Hospitals of America, along with the Texas Spine and Joint Hospital, a 20-bed private facility in Tyler, Texas, are challenging the constitutionality of Section 6001 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act.
Civil rights -- Municipal corporations -- Employment discrimination -- Retaliation -- Title VII -- Error to dismiss Title VII retaliation claim based on determination that factual findings of county personnel board, an independent state agency, were entitled to preclusive effect over the federal action -- District court improperly failed to draw distinction between Title VII and section 1983 with regard to preclusive effects of state administrative proceedings on actions brought thereunder
PATRICK L. BISHOP, SR., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BIRMINGHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT, CITY OF, Defendant, BIRMINGHAM, CITY OF, THE, Defendant-Appellee. 11th Circuit.
Federal jurisdiction -- Torts -- Removal of state court action to federal court -- Timeliness -- Appellate court need not decide whether defendant's notice of removal was timely in instant case because any error in failing to remand case to state court on ground that notice of removal was untimely would be procedural error and would be insufficient to warrant vacating judgment and remanding for new trial in state court where it was undisputed that requirements for diversity jurisdiction were met by time district court entered judgment
BRIAN MOORE, as Personal Representative on behalf of the Estate of Bernard P. Rice, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTH AMERICA SPORTS, INC., a foreign corporation, d.b.a. World Triathlon Corporation, d.b.a. Ironman Triathlon, d.b.a. Ford Ironman Florida, f.k.a. Ironman North America, USA TRIATHLON, a foreign company, Defendants-Appellees. 11th Circuit.
Insurance -- Appraisal -- Error to grant insured's motion to compel appraisal before court resolved underlying coverage dispute -- Conflict certified -- Insurer did not waive right to deny coverage by failing to deny coverage before suit was filed
CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellant, v. MICHIGAN CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, Appellee. 4th District.
Insurance -- Homeowners -- Attorney's fees -- Appraisal -- No fees were awardable for portion of case where parties were unable to agree on an umpire, and insurer filed petition for selection of neutral umpire -- Insureds were entitled to award of attorney's fees for successfully defeating insurer's request that trial court direct umpire to provide an itemized appraisal
JOSE ALEJANDRO PINEDA AND MARTHA PINEDA, Appellants/Cross-Appellees, vs. STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. 3rd District.
Insurance -- Homeowners -- Hurricane damage to home -- Attorney's fees -- Insurer's post-suit payment of additional policy proceeds entitles insured to section 627.428 attorney's fees where the insurer wrongfully caused its insured to resort to litigation in order to resolve a conflict with its insurer when it was within the company's power to resolve it -- Error to enter summary judgment for insurer in insured's action against insurer where there were factual issues as to whether insured was forced to file suit to resolve claim under policy
LLOYD BEVERLY and EDITH BEVERLY, Appellants, v. STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 2nd District.
Mortgage foreclosure -- Error to enter final summary judgment of foreclosure where plaintiff failed to file with court the original note, evidence of assignment of mortgage and note, or affidavit of ownership and filed no other admissible evidence establishing plaintiff's status as holder and owner of note and mortgage -- Appellate court unable to determine whether trial court considered copy of original note and affidavit of ownership presented by plaintiff at summary judgment hearing, as these documents were not part of record at time the motion for summary judgment was granted -- Moreover, the documents were not authenticated, filed, and served more than twenty days before hearing, as required by procedural rules
GUISEPPE SERVEDIO a/k/a Joseph Servedio, Appellant, v. US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Indenture Trustee, on behalf of the holders of Terwin Mortgage Trust 2007-AHL1, Asset-Backed Securities Series 2007-AHL1, Appellee. 4th District.
Mortgage foreclosure -- Error to enter summary judgment of foreclosure of commercial mortgage loan where lender accepted a substantial paydown after an initial default and acceleration, and the parties entered into an agreement to reinstate the mortgage after the entry of an earlier judgment -- Summary judgment was improper where there exists a triable issue regarding the reinstatement agreement and the parties' performance under it
ONE 79TH STREET ESTATES, INC. and DARRELL WILSON a/k/a Keith D. Wilson, a single man; PO BOY REALTY INVESTMENT, INC., Appellants, vs. AMERICAN INVESTMENT SERVICES, Appellee. 3rd District.
Mortgage foreclosure -- Receivership -- Trial court erred in allowing receiver to sell mortgaged property, over objection of record owner, before final judgment foreclosing owner's interest in the property -- Contracts -- In absence of statute authorizing court-appointed receiver in foreclosure case to sell mortgaged property before mortgage is foreclosed by final judgment, such authority must be provided in loan agreement between lender and borrower represented by promissory note and mortgage -- Receivership provision in instant case did not purport to give receiver any power of sale of mortgaged property before entry of final foreclosure judgment, but instead explicitly limited receiver's powers to a caretaker role, which included the authority only to operate the property and collect rents -- Under common law, mere appointment of receiver does not itself confer any of the owner's power or authority to sell property -- Finally, recognizing general interim power of a receiver to sell mortgaged property in a foreclosure case would contravene mortgagor's statutory right of redemption
SHUBH HOTELS BOCA, LLC, and ATUL BISARIA, Appellants, v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for Mutual Bank (Illinois); and NEIL MERIN, as Court Appointed Receiver for Mortgaged Property, Appellees. 4th District.
Unfair labor practices -- School boards -- Public Employees Relations Commission properly affirmed General Counsel's summary dismissal of teacher's unfair labor practices complaints, where General Counsel found that teacher failed to prove by preponderance of evidence that his protected conduct was a substantial and motivating factor in school principal's retaliatory actions -- There was not sufficient evidence of animus, or relation of adverse events to employee's participation in protected activity, to sustain allegations of unfair labor practices
JUSTIN KOREN, Appellant, vs. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS COMMISSION, Appellees. 3rd District.
Torts -- Action against corporate defendant and county by plaintiff who claimed that she was injured when escalator at airport stopped short, causing her to fall -- Error to enter directed verdicts in favor of defendants on ground that there was insufficient evidence of negligence on their part where plaintiff presented evidence showing that defendants were notified that subject escalator stopped running earlier on the day of plaintiff's fall and there was no evidence that any work was performed on the escalator, allowing jury to reasonably infer that defendants negligently failed to determine what was causing it to stop running and correct the problem -- Jury instructions -- Error to refuse to give jury instruction on negligence per se as to county -- Error to overrule plaintiff's objection to defense closing argument that there was no evidence of prior problems with subject escalator where trial court had excluded such evidence -- Plaintiff's treating physician was not required to be an expert back surgeon in order to testify to his belief that plaintiff would need surgery in the future, and it was error to exclude this testimony -- Accordingly, it was error to deny plaintiff's motion for new trial
BONNIE GREENBERG, Appellant, vs. SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION, ETC., ET AL., Appellees. 3rd District.
Torts -- Civil theft -- Complaint which alleged that plaintiffs made a loan to defendant pursuant to an oral agreement, and that at the time of the loan, defendant had no intention to repay it and/or intended not to repay the funds, stated cause of action for civil theft -- Error to grant defendant's motion for judgment on pleadings -- Allegation that defendant had no intention to repay the funds and/or intended not to repay the funds is sufficient to state claim for common law fraud, and common law fraud is explicitly included in the theft statute -- Economic loss doctrine does not bar statutory claim for civil theft -- There is no merit to defendant's contention that it is impossible to have an action for civil theft where there has been a failure to repay money unless there has been a conversion of a specific fund
WILLIAM P. WALKER, III AND GEMMA M. WALKER, HIS WIFE, Appellants, vs. JAIME A. FIGAROLA, Appellee. 3rd District.
Torts -- Res judicata -- Action by insurance company against attorney who had litigated personal injury protection lawsuits against company on behalf of insureds, alleging claim for restitution and fraud based on monies company paid out in connection with the PIP suits -- Trial court erred in dismissing complaint on ground that it stemmed from PIP lawsuits, and had been previously adjudicated by courts of competent jurisdiction or resolved by settlement agreements -- Application of res judicata was not appropriate because neither the parties nor the cause of action were the same -- Application of collateral estoppel was not appropriate where issues were not the same as those adjudicated in PIP suits
UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, vs. LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL I. LIBMAN, AND MICHAEL I. LIBMAN, ESQUIRE, Appellees 3rd District.
Wrongful death -- Negligent entrustment -- Negligent undertaking -- A defendant cannot be held liable for negligent entrustment or negligent undertaking based on his having taken his alcohol-impaired brother's car keys and then put the keys in a place where his brother easily found them, resulting in his brother causing a fatal collision
GERALD CANTALUPO, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Suzanne Marie Cantalupo, Appellant, v. PAUL J. LEWIS, Appellee. 4th District.
The Law Lady. For more info, go to www.easleyappellate.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)