Damages

No Bad Faith, No Consequential Damages! Florida Supreme Court Denies Insured’s Attempt To Recover Extra-Contractual Consequential Damages in a First-Party Property Claim

A recent decision from the Supreme Court of Florida punctuates well-established federal precedent that consequential damages in insurance disputes are not recoverable absent a separate action for bad faith.  In Citizens Property Ins. Corp. v. Manor House LLC, et al, Manor House, owner of rental apartment buildings, filed an action against its property insurer for breach of contract and fraud...Read More

You’re No Expert! $6.3 Million Verdict Tossed Because Expert Testimony on Pain and Suffering had No Sufficient Basis (PA)

In Cowher et al. v. Kodali et al., the Pennsylvania Superior Court granted a retrial because of erroneously admitted expert testimony.  Cowher, brought a wrongful death and survival medical malpractice claim against the doctor that failed to recognize her husband’s heart condition, which ultimately led to his fatal heart attack.  Mr. Cowher went to see defendant Dr. Sobhan Kodali after he...Read More

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Refuses to Implement Bright Line Rule on Defective Jury Awards

Last week, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Mader v. Duquesne Light Company, refused to implement a bright line rule with respect to mandating a trial court’s options when a jury returns an inconsistent, favorable plaintiff verdict with an inconsistent damages award. Instead, the Court indicated that trial courts largely have broad discretion in terms of requiring new trials for damages. As...Read More

In Pennsylvania, Homeowners Need Not Show Diminution In Value When Calculating Damages for Defective Construction Claims

In Woullard v. Sanner Concrete and Supply, the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently affirmed the lower court’s damages ruling, stating that the plaintiff homeowners were not required to present evidence of diminution in value of their home, attributable to the defective work, as part of calculating damages. Plaintiff homeowners hired several contractors to perform work on the home’s stonework,...Read More

Buckle Up! New York Now Requires All Passengers 16 and Up To Wear Seat Belts

NEW YORK’S NEW SEAT-BELT LAW REQUIRING ALL OCCUPANTS INSIDE A MOTOR-VEHICLE TO BUCKLE UP TAKES EFFECT ON NOVEMBER 1, 2020 https://nypost.com/2020/08/11/new-york-will-now-require-seat-belts-for-all-car-occupants/ On November 1, 2020, New York will become the 30th state to require all occupants inside a vehicle over the age of sixteen to wear seatbelts. The new law will now make it mandatory for...Read More

Default is not a Total Loss (NY)

In a personal injury action, plaintiff Castaldini claims personal injury when a propane tank exploded at the home of defendant Walsh. Upon defendant’s failure to answer, plaintiff’s motion to enter default judgment was granted by the trial court, and the case was sent to inquest for a trial on damages. At the inquest trial, plaintiff testified as to his injury and submitted a written sworn...Read More

Importance of “Backing Up” Claims in MVA Case (PA)

In Ruffin v. Desh United Corporation et al. plaintiff learned a lesson fit for an evidence course lecture after he appealed the trial court’s decision in his personal injury case. According to plaintiff, he was injured while crossing the street when defendant driver backed into Ruffin with his car. The other defendants in the matter are defendant’s employers. After defendants appealed an...Read More

CY Pres – Enforcing an Unsigned Settlement Release (PA)

The Western District of Pennsylvania recently determined that the absence of a signature did not void the underlying settlement agreement in a class action lawsuit.  In Abramson, et al. v. Agentra LLC, et al., the District Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to enforce class action settlement after the parties reached an oral agreement and a Joint Status Report Regarding Class Action...Read More

In Trademark Dispute over Engagement Rings, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals asks the Southern District of New York to Reconsider (NY)

In Tiffany and Company v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, the United Second Circuit Court of Appeals found a triable issue of fact as to whether Costco’s otherwise unbranded engagement rings identified as “Tiffany” rings by signs placed  at the point-of-sale infringed upon Tiffany’s trademark.  As part of its lawsuit, Tiffany alleged, that these point-of-sale signs constituted trademark...Read More

General Contractor Overhead and Profit Deducted in Actual Cash Value Settlements (PA)

Earlier this week, on August 24, 2020, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania issued its decision in the consolidated appeals of Kurach v. Truck Insurance Exchange and Wintersteen v. Truck Insurance Exchange.  By way of brief background, in both cases, after the plaintiffs experienced water damage to their homes, they filed claims with Truck Insurance Exchange (“Truck”).  Both plaintiffs opted for...Read More