Legal and Firm News

Case Summaries

Admiralty

[03/20] Roberts v. Sea-Land Services, Inc.
In a suit under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act for injuries sustained in 2002 at an Alaska marine terminal while working for the respondent, an award of benefits at the fiscal year 2002 statutory maximum rate is affirmed, as an employee is "newly awarded compensation" under the Act when he or she first becomes disabled and thereby becomes statutorily entitled to benefits, no matter whether, or when, a compensation order issues on his or her behalf.

[03/16] Aggarao v. MOL Ship Management Co., Ltd.
In a suit by a Filipino seaman for injuries sustained on a ship in the Chesapeake Bay, the district court's ruling on dismissal for improper venue is: 1) affirmed in part, where the doctrine of equitable estoppel required the plaintiff to arbitrate his claims in the Philippines pursuant to an enforceable arbitration agreement; and 2) vacated in part, where a) the district court was not constrained to dismiss this case, and b) the district court was not obliged to deny the plaintiff's injunction request as moot when it deemed his claims to be arbitrable.

[03/16] Markel American Insurance Co. v. Diaz-Santiago
In litigation between the owner of a ship and the ship's mortgagor in which the mortgagor sought an award of attorney's fees, costs, and expenses arising from its procured release of the ship after its confiscation and defense of the validity of an insurance policy on the ship, the district court's grant of summary judgment to the mortgagor is affirmed, where: 1) challenges to the district court's denial of the owner's strike and protective order motions were without merit; 2) contractual agreements between the parties as to maintenance of insurance and liability for costs were valid and binding; and 3) the district court properly denied the owner's Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment.

[03/08] Otal Investments, Ltd. v. M.V. Tricolor
In a suit arising from a maritime accident involving three ships: 1) the district court's allocation of liability is affirmed, where the district court carefully considered and thoroughly explained its liability formula and its allocation percentages; 2) the district court is reversed on the issue of whether the owners of one of the ships were entitled to limit their liability under the Limitation of Liability Act, where it committed clear in finding that the ship owners had knowledge or privity of the acts of negligence that caused the accident; and 3) the case is remanded for the district court to make a specific factual determination of that issue.

Read More

Injury & Tort Law

[05/16] Certain Interested Underwriters at Lloyd's, London v. Stolberg
In a suit by an insurer to obtain a declaration that its policy did not obligate it either to defend a personal injury suit or to indemnify the insured, the district court's summary judgment in favor of the insurer is affirmed, where: 1) the contract excluded coverage for injuries arising out of operations performed for insured by contractors; and 2) other exclusions in the policy did not create ambiguity so as to provide coverage.

[05/11] Al Shimari v. CACI International, Inc.
In suits by former prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, alleging that the defendant prison contractors and certain of their employees were liable in common law tort and under the Alien Tort Statute for torturing and abusing them during their incarceration, consolidated appeals by the defendants are dismissed, where: 1) there was no independent basis for appellate jurisdiction premised on the law-of-war defense, Saleh preemption, or Mangold immunity, so the Fourth Circuit was without pendent jurisdiction to further consider the appellants' contentions that the plaintiffs' claims presented nonjusticiable political questions; and 2) the exercise of jurisdiction was precluded regardless of whether the appellants' political question defense was inextricably intertwined with any of the three proffered bases for jurisdiction, or whether those bases were similarly interdependent with one another.

[05/07] Bettencourt v. Hennessey Industries, Inc.
In a suit claiming that the use of the defendant's machines to grind asbestos-containing brake linings resulted in exposure to airborne asbestos fibers that caused injury, the trial court's judgment in favor of the defendant on all causes of action is reversed in part, where it was error to grant judgment on the pleadings to the defendant and an abuse of discretion to deny the plaintiffs leave to amend their complaints with respect to their causes of action for strict products liability and negligence.

[05/03] Beckwith v. Dahl
In a suit alleging intentional interference with an expected inheritance (IIEI) and deceit by false promise, the trial court's order sustaining a demurrer and dismissing the case is reversed, where: 1) the tort of IIEI is recognized as a valid cause of action; and 2) the complaint alleged sufficient facts to support a claim for deceit, as all the elements of promissory fraud were adequately alleged, but there were insufficient facts stated to allege IIEI.

Read More