Recently in Injury & Tort Law Category

During a conference with over a 100 lawyers in his courtroom, District Court Judge Dan Polster, who has been assigned to handle the consolidated multi-district litigation in the Opioid crisis cases, demanded that the parties in the extraordinarily complex litigation try to figure out a way to settle the whole matter.

In his remarks, Judge Polster explained his belief that everyone in litigation is somewhat responsible for the current opioid epidemic. From the doctors to drug makers, distributors, hospitals, and even governments and individuals, Judge Polster believes there's plenty of blame to share, but that pointing fingers just isn't worthwhile. He explained that on that day, based on the numbers, 150 individuals would die due to opioids.

FACTS: A law professor grabs a colleague by the shoulder to talk to him about a dispute with the law librarian.

LAW: A battery occurs when a person acts to cause a harmful or offensive contact, which would offend the ordinary person.

ISSUE: Is this a law exam question or a real case?

U.S. District Judge Jack Zouhary probably wishes it were a fictitious case. In Gerber v. Veltri, the Ohio judge said the case was "seemingly ripped from the pages of a first-year torts exam, with the added twist that the parties are, in real life, law school professors."

Spying on your spouse used to involve reading their mail, looking for lipstick on their collar, looking at call logs, etc. Some of these spy techniques, though widely used in unhappy marriages, can be actionable offenses.

But how culpable are makers of technology that facilitate spying? That is the question at the center of the recent Sixth Circuit case, Luis v. Awareness.

The Sixth Circuit just affirmed a second dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds in just as many weeks.

In this case with international implications, the Sixth Circuit found that American citizen Brandon Hefferan should have brought suit in Germany instead of the United States, following his nightmarish experience with a surgical stapler that malfunctioned.

A salvage scrapper will have to pay the full amount of some $10 million in cleaning costs to the EPA according to a recent ruling by the Sixth Circuit which affirmed the decision of a federal district court.

That lower federal appeals courts was not persuaded by defendant Mark Sawyer's theories, saying that in this case of first impression, the EPA must be compensated for its clean-up expenditures after Sawyer's company completely contaminated a 300-acre plot of land in violation of federal environmental law.

Ricky Edwards worked for CSX Transportation for 31 years before his career was ended by a freak accident -- caused in part by a "nasty" toilet. When Edwards showed up to work with an upset stomach one day, his nausea was only exacerbated by the foul conditions in his train's bathroom: urine, feces, and "blue chemical" splattered all over the toilet.

When his nausea escalated, Edwards chose to ralph over the rails, rather than in the foul toilet. In the process, he fell from the train, breaking his back and ending his career with CSX. And that wasn't the end of the gut-retching news for Edwards, whose suit against CSX was tossed by the Sixth Circuit last Friday.

An interesting case was affirmed for the defendant ski-resort at the Sixth Circuit recently, offering refresher insights into the proper means and technique of statutory interpretation.

The case involved a lady in a wheelchair on a ski-lift tramway. Despite the prosaic facts, the plaintiff offered some curious legal theories in her injury claim.

A nursing home patient's agreement to arbitrate "any and all disputes" against the facility doesn't prevent his estate from bringing a wrongful death suit after he died in the home's care, the Sixth Circuit ruled last Friday.

The court rejected arguments that the Federal Arbitration Act gave the nursing home the right to compel arbitration, finding that the FAA did not change Kentucky state law on wrongful death suits.

The Clean Air Act might be massive, complex, and unwieldy, but it doesn't "occupy the field" of air pollution control, the Sixth Circuit reminded us in two decisions released earlier this month. As such, the Clean Air Act does not preempt state common law claims against polluters who are regulated under the Act.

Even if you're in compliance with federal rules and regulations, you can still be sued for pollution under state common law, the court found. The ruling puts the Sixth Circuit in line with precedent from the Second and Third Circuits, but veers slightly away from Supreme Court caselaw.

Alternative Title: Expectation of Privacy Doesn't Apply to Pocket-Dials

An expectation of privacy doesn't apply to your accidental pocket-dials, the Sixth Circuit ruled on Tuesday. Someone who pocket-dials, butt-dials, purse-dials, or otherwise unintentionally calls another party doesn't have a reasonable expectation of privacy, the court ruled, and whoever is on the receiving end of the call is free to eavesdrop -- even to record your conversations.

The case came after an executive accidentally pocket-dialed a colleague's secretary. That secretary listened in, for over an hour and a half as plans for firing her boss were discussed. When she revealed them, the executive sued, claiming that her eavesdropping was an unlawful interception of private communications. Not so, the Sixth Circuit ruled.