News & Analysis as of

Car Accident Corporate Counsel

BakerHostetler

Fifth Circuit Parses Crucial Distinction Between Class Liability Theories and Class Damages Theories

BakerHostetler on

A recent opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit illustrates the importance of carefully scrutinizing classwide liability theories, even where district courts have flexibility assessing classwide...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

Should an Employer be Held Vicariously Liable for a Motor Vehicle Accident Its Employee Caused on Her Way Home After Working the...

A California Court of Appeals affirmed an employer’s Motion for Summary Judgment on that question, finding that the employer was not vicariously liable in a recent opinion. The case involves Clanisha Villegas, who worked for...more

Best Best & Krieger LLP

When Is An Employer Responsible For Accidents On Employees’ Commutes? - California Court Of Appeal Reverses $14 million Judgment...

An employer is liable for an accident on an employee’s commute to and from work only if the vehicle was required for work on the day of the employee’s accident, a California appellate court has ruled. ...more

Littler

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Sovereign Immunity Does Not Protect Tribal Employee Sued Individually

Littler on

On April 25, 2017, by unanimous vote (8-0) vote, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a Native American tribe’s sovereign immunity from lawsuits does not extend to a tribal employee sued over actions he took within the scope of...more

Kilpatrick

The Supreme Court’s Decision in Lewis v. Clarke Potentially Opens the Door of Tort Liability for Tribal Employees

Kilpatrick on

On April 25, 2017, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Lewis v. Clarke, holding that tribal sovereign immunity does not bar individual-capacity damages actions against tribal employees for torts committed within the...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

“Going and Coming Rule”: Employer Not Liable For Accident Caused By Employee On Commute Home Where Employee Had Option To Take Bus...

In Gail M. Lynn, et al. v. Tatitlek Support Services, Inc., et al., 2017 WL 696008, published February 24, 2017, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, affirmed the trial court’s granting of summary judgment in...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

Court Finds Customary Use of Work Van for Personal Purposes is Regular Use and Not Covered Under Employee’s Personal Auto Policy

In Medina v. GEICO Indemnity (No. F072548, filed 2/8/17), a California appeals court ruled that a work van admittedly furnished to an employee for both business and personal purposes, being used for personal purposes at the...more

Cozen O'Connor

When a Policy Limits Offer is Not Enough: A Cautionary Tale of a Failure to Settle Case

Cozen O'Connor on

In a recent unpublished decision, the California Court of Appeals upheld a $3 million judgment against an auto liability insurer that rejected proposed language in a settlement agreement, notwithstanding the insurer’s policy...more

Alston & Bird

Snapchat Sued in Georgia Distracted Driving Lawsuit

Alston & Bird on

A recently filed Georgia lawsuit seeks to hold Snapchat liable for a high speed motor vehicle accident that allegedly occurred as a result of the at-fault motorist’s use of the social media application. Snapchat users...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Eleventh Circuit Refuses to Credit Expert’s Guess on Causation

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has issued an important decision on expert testimony, Hughes v. Kia Motors. Patricia Hughes filed a wrongful death action against Kia Motors after her daughter,...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide