Remove Cause of Action Remove Court Rules Remove Manufacturing
article thumbnail

Insurers Get Claims Trimmed In Factory Explosion Suit

Law 360

Insurers for a glass manufacturer cannot pursue most of their claims against two contractors over a 2017 factory explosion, a Michigan federal court ruled, saying waiver of subrogation clauses in the underlying service contracts bar all causes of action except those arising from gross negligence.

article thumbnail

Inventorship Correction Affirmed for Patent on Intermodal Container for Transporting Gaseous Fluids

Patently O

by Dennis Crouch In a recent nonprecedential decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court ruling ordering the correction of inventorship for U.S. Tube-Mac, is the plaintiff in this case and is looking to manufacture its own version of the container systems. Tube-Mac Indus., Campbell , No. 2022-2170 (Fed.

Statute 59
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Canada top court rules multi-crown litigation provision constitutional in opioid class action

JURIST

Faced with a public health crisis caused by the opioid epidemic, BC enacted the Opioid Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act in 2018. This legislation creates a statutory cause of action against the manufacturers, distributors and consultations of opioid drugs for causing or contributing to opioid-related disease, injury or illness.

article thumbnail

Spooky Torts: The 2023 List of Litigation Horrors

JonathanTurley

The court ruled against her and found that the park’s duty was only to “make conditions as safe as they appear to be” and that Munoz “ was aware of the risk she encountered, and expected to be surprised, startled, and scared.” particularly those with ravenous monkeys. Ferlito) and her little lamb (Mr.

Tort 58
article thumbnail

September 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

Under the Endangered Species Act, the court vacated the FWS’s biological opinion because the incidental take statement lacked “the requisite specificity of mitigation measures for the polar bear” and because the take finding for the polar bear was arbitrary and capricious. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v. BP p.l.c. ,