Current Legal News

Case Summaries

Admiralty

[07/03] Crowley Marine Servs. Inc. v. Maritrans Inc.
In an action arising out of the collision of plaintiff's tug boat with defendants' oil tanker, a district court's reallocation of fault in the matter is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in considering the coordinated nature of the tug escort, the tug boat's violations of Rules 5 and 17(b), or the negligence of both plaintiff and the tug's captain; and 2) it did not err in apportioning 70% of the responsibility for the collision to the tug boat.

[06/25] Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker
In an action brought against Exxon for economic losses resulting from the Exxon Valdez oil spill, a circuit court ruling remitting the punitive damages award to $2.5 billion is vacated and remanded for further reduction where: 1) the Court was equally divided on the question of whether a shipowner may be liable for punitive damages without acquiescence in the actions causing harm, and thus the circuit court's opinion is undisturbed on the issue; 2) federal statutory law does not bar a punitive award on top of damages for economic loss; but 3) the award in this case should be limited to an amount equal to compensatory damages, or approximately $500 million.

[06/25] Evergreen Int'l, S.A. v. Norfolk Dredging Co.
In a suit under admiralty arising out of the allision between a container ship and a submerged dredge spoil pipeline located outside a federally marked navigational channel, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) findings of comparative fault were not clearly erroneous; 2) the court did not err in failing to afford plaintiff the benefit of a Pennsylvania Rule; 3) plaintiff could not prevail on its argument that defendant was not entitled to a damages cap under the Oil Pollution Act since they failed to prove that defendant violated a federal regulation such that it could invoke the Pennsylvania Rule; 4) the finding of comparative fault assigning the defendant ten percent of the fault was not erroneous; and 5) defendant's argument alleging miscalculation of its damages cap was moot since there is no reason to overturn the finding that defendant was ten percent at fault.

Read More

Injury & Tort Law

[07/03] Crowley Marine Servs. Inc. v. Maritrans Inc.
In an action arising out of the collision of plaintiff's tug boat with defendants' oil tanker, a district court's reallocation of fault in the matter is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in considering the coordinated nature of the tug escort, the tug boat's violations of Rules 5 and 17(b), or the negligence of both plaintiff and the tug's captain; and 2) it did not err in apportioning 70% of the responsibility for the collision to the tug boat.

[07/03] Sherman v. Winco Fireworks, Inc.
In an action arising from an accident with fireworks, order granting defendant-fireworks manufacturer leave to amend and remand for a new trial on the plaintiffs' failure-to-warn claim in addition to plaintiff husband's pendent consortium claim is reversed in part where: 1) the district court did not apply the good-cause standard in ruling on motion to amend; 2) and the district court abused its discretion in allowing the amendment; 3) and the error was not harmless as it significantly affected plaintiffs' claims.

[07/02] Anderson v. Commerce Construction Services, Inc.
In an action for negligence arising out of a Nebraska subcontractor's employee's injuries while performing demolition work in Kansas, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) Kansas courts would have applied the lex loci delicti choice of law rule whereby the state where the tort occurred governs the merits of the litigation; 2) Kansas courts have only applied section 185 of the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws to cases dealing with subrogation; and 3) application of section 184's most significant relationship test would result in defendant prevailing.

Read More