Cruz was arrested and indicted for murder. After spending two years in jail, a jury acquitted him. Thereafter, he filed a civil action alleging that the lead detective misled the grand jury and thereby violated his civil rights. In Cruz v. Camden Co. Police Dep’t, the trial court granted the Department’s motion for summary judgment … Read more
Clark v. Nenna arose out of a surgical procedure that the defendant performed on the plaintiff. The plaintiff alleged emotional distress caused by the defendant’s professional negligence, i.e., failure to remove surgical washers from the plaintiff’s leg. The plaintiff did not allege that the defendant’s conduct was intentional or willful. The nature of the plaintiff’s … Read more
In Woodford v. Commonw. of Penn. Ins. Dept., the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was called on to decide whether an insurance broker violated the state’s Insurance Department Act of 1921 by charging customers a non-refundable application fee. The Insurance Commissioner and a panel of the Commonwealth Court agreed that 40 P.S. §310.74(b) prohibited the fee. And … Read more
In February 2013, the plaintiffs purchased a snow tubing season pass from the defendant mountain resort. The reverse side of the season pass contained a release agreement, which provided that the signatory both assumed all the risks of snow tubing and released the resort from liability. Plaintiff skimmed the release agreement and signed it. The … Read more
In Matthews v. Prospect Crozer, LLC, a personal injury suit wherein Appellant sued after a tree fell on him, the Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment. The Court held that Appellant failed to adduce sufficient facts in discovery to prove that the defendants owed him a legal duty under Restatement (Second) … Read more
S.H. v. K & H Transport involved a 17-year-old special-needs student at the time of the events at issue. S.H. sued the bus company that transported her to and from school. The trial court ruled that the bus company did not have a duty “to protect against the alleged injury”—sexual assault—and that no reasonable person … Read more
In Kornfiend v. New Werner Holding Co., Kornfiend sued New Werner as well as Home Depot and alleged strict product liability and negligence claims related to the design, manufacture, and sale of a ladder which Kornfiend fell from as he worked on his house. The Superior Court ruled that the lower court erred in denying Home … Read more
State Farm Ins. Co. v. Kitko involved a dispute over a decedent’s insurance policy. The decedent’s ex-wife and brother both claimed they were the primary beneficiary. On appeal, the ex-wife challenged the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the brother. The Superior Court reversed, holding that the decedent did not effectuate a … Read more
In Campbell v. PA School Bds. Ass’n, the 3rd Circuit held that, though the District Court erred in utilizing a heightened standard of proof, the grant of summary judgment was affirmed because the petitioner’s civil rights claim would fail under any standard of proof.
In Dobransky v. EQT Production, the Superior Court ruled that a person who merely drives a truck to deliver a single raw material to a well site is not a person whose work consists of “the removal, excavation, or drilling of soil, rock, or minerals” within Section 302(a) of the Workers’ Compensation Act.