Recently in Injury & Tort Law Category

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is allowing the Abu Ghraib torture lawsuits against military contractors to proceed ... for now.

In an 11-3 decision after en banc rehearing, the Fourth Circuit reinstated two torture claims in Virginia and Maryland federal courts. The court did not rule on the merits of either claim; it only agreed to let judges in the cases review more evidence before addressing the contractors’ immunity claims.

If the oh-so-dreamy Mad Men star Jon Hamm appeared on your porch and demanded entry to your home to look for a hooligan, you would happily admit him. Pour him a stiff drink. Sit for one of his clipped-toned, Don Draper-esque observations that would leave you questioning your life choices, but happy that your path had been corrected by such a charismatic passerby.

If South Carolina bail bondsman Jon Ham showed up on your porch with a shotgun and demanded entry to your home to find a fugitive, you might end up arguing qualified immunity in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Guess which Jon we're discussing today?

This week, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a judgment against self-proclaimed American Nazi leader Bill White for Fair Housing Act (FHA) and Virginia law violations, intentional infliction of emotional distress damages, and attorney's fees. The Fourth Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, found no reversible error in the case.

This is not the first civil dispute based on an FHA complaint in which the Fourth Circuit has ruled against White.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a decision that could help your clients who have received settlement offers on their Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) claims.

Shortly after Margaret Warren's husband passed, she learned that her husband had an overdue personal VISA credit card account at Branch Banking & Trust Co. (BB&T). Warren tried to obtain the signature card on the account, which was listed only under her husband's name. BB&T, however, had started sending Warren statements bearing both her and her husband's name. Not knowing better, she started making payments.

Suspension from legal practice may be embarrassing, but it's not the end of the world. Some attorneys might take up a new hobby during suspension. Others would bide their time contracting as a researcher. Alexander Zeno passed his suspension time with a $17 million pro se lawsuit against the Justice Department under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).

Zeno is a criminal defense attorney who practices law primarily in Puerto Rico. He currently resides in Maryland, (which explains how this case made its way to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals).

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed two torture cases this week against military contractors, finding that the plaintiffs' state law claims were preempted by federal law.

Since the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, the U.S. military has seized and detained Iraqi citizens who it suspected of being enemy combatants or having useful intelligence. Some of these detainees, like the plaintiffs in the Fourth Circuit cases, were imprisoned at Abu Ghraib prison. Although the prison was operated in the war zone by the U.S. Army, the U.S. government, in response to a severe shortage of military intelligence personnel, contracted with private corporations to provide civilian interrogators and interpreters.

CACI International and L-3 Services, the defendants in these cases, were among the contractors.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that a chemical company accused of selling chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein's regime in the '80s cannot be held liable under the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA).

In the 1980s, the Republic of Iraq, then under Hussein's dictatorial control, was embroiled in a long-term armed conflict with Iran. International news media widely reported - and the United States government explicitly condemned - the Iraqi regime's large-scale use of mustard gas and other chemical weapons against Iran.

A three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that the federal government was correct in withholding Medicaid money from the State of West Virginia. In the simplest words -- the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found that the State's Attorney General had misapplied funds owed the government from a pharmaceutical lawsuit settlement.

The ruling came out on Wednesday and held in favor of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, reports Legal Newsline.

Last week, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against several drug stores in a lawsuit brought by the West Virginia Attorney General, Darrell McGraw. As such, the drug retailers lost their bid to have their case heard by a federal court and instead, must have their action heard before the state court, under West Virginia law.

The defendants in the case include CVS Pharmacy, Kmart, Kroger, Wal-Mart, Walgreens and Target, who alleged that the claim as a "disguised class action," reports WOWK News.

• Read the Fourth Circuit's Full Decision in Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Gaston Copper Recycling Corp., 06-1714