The Legal Intelligencer Blog

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Tuesday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer, which also includes this week’s edition of Pennsylvania Law Weekly. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

Today’s lead story in PLW is a look at the effect Justice Joan Orie Melvin’s suspension will have on the state Supreme Court. As reporters Zack Needles and Ben Present write, the high court might have lost its tiebreaker based on a study of cases over the past two years.

Below the fold on Page 1, Ben Present writes that new juvenile rules aim to protect confidentiality.

On Page 3, Ben Present writes that the Commonwealth Court has ruled there is no benefits exception for “funded” employment.

There’s much more inside this week’s PLW, including Samuel C. Stretton’s Ethics Forum, in which he writes about lawyers drafting pleadings without signing their names; Sam Pond and Allison Wheeler’s Workers’ Compensation commentary on the real goal behind eliminating administrative burdens; and Shira J. Goodman and Lynn A. Marks’ Judiciary commentary on why sufficient funding and willing citizens are critical to the courts.

The top story in today’s Legal is Dechert’s products liability and mass torts group no longer serving as the king of the firm’s litigation focus. As reporter Gina Passarella writes, the firm has lost at least five products liability partners since last year and has adjusted its focus in some ways.

Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Saranac Hale Spencer writes that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit sympathized with Blank Rome and another law firm in a document battle between a defunct corporation and the government, which is seeking hundreds of allegedly privileged documents being held by Blank Rome. The company tried to appeal a district court order granting the government’s request for the documents, but was ultimately dismissed, although a split three-judge panel took a sympathetic view of the position the law firms were in.

In more Regional News on Page 3, reporter Zack Needles writes that the state Supreme Court justices have agreed to hear arguments on whether medical malpractice defendants may rely on an “error in judgment” defense at trial.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sibling publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

In a Health Care Law column on Page 5, Vasilios J. Kalogredis and Karilynn Bayus write about the dilemma of recovering costs in an overpayment victory.

In an Intellectual Property column on Page 7, Paul F. Prestia and Antranig Baronian write that patent clearance opinions are still important and still relevant.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Tuesday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer, which also includes this week’s edition of Pennsylvania Law Weekly. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

Today's paper also includes the Workers' Compensation supplement.

The top story in today’s Legal is reporter Ben Present’s look at the state attorney general race, in which candidates Kathleen Kane and David Freed diverge on health care and the investigation of former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky. Both candidates answered questionnaires, which appear in full in the paper.

Also above the fold on Page 1, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that an ex-priest said Monday that he reported alleged abuse to Monsignor William J. Lynn, a defendant in the Catholic Archdiocese of Philadelphia sex-abuse case. The ex-priest said he left the priesthood because one of his colleagues, whom he claims abuse him for four years, was not removed from ministry by church officials.

Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Gina Passarella writes that Stevens & Lee has filed a sanctions motion against Elliott Greenleaf and its chairman for alleging that a partner who left Elliott Greenleaf for Stevens & Lee misused escrow funds. This is the latest chapter in an ongoing battle between the two sides.

In more Regional News on Page 3, reporter Saranac Hale Spencer writes that a federal judge has ruled in favor of South Philadelphia sandwich shop Steak’em Up in a trademark suit filed by national frozen food giant Steak-umm.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sibling publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

In an E-Discovery column on Page 5, Ross Cunningham and Elizabeth Lemoine write about preparing for e-discovery supplemental obligations.

In a Litigation column on Page 7, Harrie Samaras and Judy Weintraub write about what you need to know about selecting a mediator for ADR.

Today’s lead story in PLW is the state Supreme Court grappling with PTSD benefits for police during oral arguments last week. As Ben Present writes, the question of “abnormal working conditions” and “extraordinary” events loom large.

Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Zack Needles writes that the plaintiffs bar is criticizing the state Supreme Court’s ruling that courts must consider a product’s multiple uses when assessing that product’s risk. Some plaintiffs attorneys have said it gives defendants an unfair advantage.

On Page 3, Ben Present writes that a Lackawanna County judge has ruled that a pair of Pennsylvania homeowners may proceed with their claim that Wells Fargo committed a breach of contract by failing to offer the permanent changes to their mortgage payments after a trial period with lower rates.

There’s much more inside this week’s PLW, including Samuel C. Stretton’s Ethics Forum, in which he says a lawyer must be careful if paying a non-expert witness; Sam Pond and Allison Wheeler’s workers’ compensation commentary about proposed legislation extending treatment time that promotes “doctor shopping”; a defamation suit against a mortgage company pre-empted by the FCRA; a ruling that PennDOT highway plans were de facto taking; and Jeff Jubelirer’s public relations commentary about how to respond to commenters.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Friday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

The top story this morning is a look at Cozen O’Connor’s firm financials. As reporter Gina Passarella writes, the firm grew revenue 6 percent and profits per equity partner 8.3 percent in 2011, marking historic highs for the firm. The firm also saw its profit margin jump three percentage points to 33 percent.

Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Sandra Mazer Moss said an appeal by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals of her decision not to dismiss digestive drug products liability claims against the drugmaker at the preliminary objections stage should be quashed.

In more Regional News on Page 3, reporter Jeff Mordock writes that the Delaware Chancery Court’s criticism of two separate chief executive offers in recent opinions represents a lesson that might be missed: the court’s willingness to let the shareholders determine a merger’s fate when no rival bidder emerges.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

In an Asset Management column on Page 5, Mark L. Silow writes about planning for some proposed changes in the tax code.

In a Bankruptcy Update on Page 7, Francis J. Lawall and Evelyn J. Meltzer write about arbitrating bankruptcy disputes, noting that unless they are pursued in a timely fashion, you run the risk of losing your rights.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

More Million-Plus Awards Out of Philly in 2010

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff
 
There were a few other cases involving awards over $1 million that The Legal couldn't fit into the print version of the story, "FJD's Million-Plus Awards Increase by One-Third." So here are the details, including three cases not yet reported in The Legal:

-- A jury awarded $1 million, including $250,000 for pain and suffering, $75,000 for loss of consortium, and $675,000 for future economic damages, in the case of Seving v. Chollak on Oct. 15 on its finding that plaintiff Carolyn Seving developed a foot drop because of a nerve injury that occurred after her total hip replacement. The plaintiff’s complaint said that Seving was placed into an exercise sling after her surgery, but her narcotic pain medication diminished hercapacity to feel pain in her right leg or any pressure that was exerted on her nerves because of the sling.

Dr. William Chollak, who conducted the hip replacement at Chestnut Hill Hospital, was voluntarily dismissed from the case after jury selection was commenced. Chollak also permitted the plaintiff to use Chollak's neurology expert to testify on the behalf of the plaintiff, which gave them a neurology expert when they had none before, Chestnut Hill Hospital's post-trial motion for relief said.

The hospital also said in its post-trial motion that Philadelphia Common Pleas Judge Joseph Papalini spoke with the jury and reported to counsel that the jury members said they believed Chollak was at fault for Seving's injury, but that since Chollak, who was not on the verdict sheet, had worked for the hospital for many years, he “was essentially Chestnut Hill Hospital.”

The defense argued that Seving’s nerve injury occurred during surgery, while the plaintiff argued that her nerve injury occurred because she was placed in a sling post-surgery, court papers said. Plaintiffs attorney Laura Feldman, of Feldman & Pinto in Philadelphia, said that while the purpose of the sling was to exercise in bed, the nurses thought its purpose was to immobilize Seving. Defense attorney Fred J. Hughes, of McCumber Daniels Buntz Hartig & Puig in Eagleville, declined comment.

-- A jury awarded $1 million, including $750,000 and $250,000 in loss of consortium, in Brogin v. Sovereign Distributors on Nov. 22 on plaintiff Ira Brogin’s claim that a chair in a furniture retail store collapsed out from under him and caused Brogin to have neck and lower back pain that interferes with his daily life.

The plaintiffs said in their pretrial memorandum that the chair, purchased by Sovereign Distributors (doing business as Avalon Carpet, Tile and Flooring) from distributor Raymour & Flanigan, was defectively designed in the bracket attaching the chair legs to the chair seat. According to the docket, the jury found Sovereign Distributors 15 percent liable, Raymour & Flanigan 15 percent liable and chair designer Douglas Furniture of California 70 percent liable.

Plaintiffs attorney Samuel J. Pace Jr., of Dugan Birinkmann Maginnis & Pace in Philadelphia, said there was a confidential high-low agreement entered with at least one of the defendants. There will be no appeal, he said, unless Raymour & Flanigan appeals against the chair’s importer.

While the defense argued that Brogin’s pain was related to pre-existing problems, the jurors said they found Brogin and his experts credible, Pace said. The event itself was captured on surveillance, Pace said. Douglas Furniture of California defense counsel Elizabeth F. Walker, of Kennedy Campbell Lipski & Dochney in Philadelphia, and Raymour & Flanigan defense counsel Patrick J. Hasson, of Baginski Mezzanotte Hasson & Rubinate, did not respond to requests for comment.

-- In the largest judicial finding not yet reported in The Legal, Judge Arnold L. New awarded $1.5 million in Turnkey Construction Services Inc. v. Allied Preet Management on Oct. 29.

Turnkey Construction Services said in its complaint that defendants Gagandeep Lakhmna, Allied Preet Management and Creating Real Estate Solutions contracted with Turnkey to improve the defendants’ loft building located at 717 N. American St., Philadelphia. But Lakhmna had set up a “labyrinth of under capitalized companies ... to work in concert to secure loans and construction services and to avoid payment” to the plaintiff and other companies, the complaint said. In their answer, the defendants denied making misrepresentations to the detriment of the plaintiff.

Plaintiffs attorney John J. Delany III, of Delany & O'Brien in Philadephia, did not respond to a request for comment. Jeffrey S. Saltz, of the Law Office of Jeffrey S. Saltz in Philadelphia and originally defense counsel in the case, said he withdrew his appearance before the case went to trial and the award was entered via default judgment.

Amaris Elliott-Engel can be reached by e-mailing aelliott-engel@alm.com.

Update: Avandia Settlements Average $46K

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff
 
Last week, The Legal reported that the first bellwether trial in the Avandia Multidistrict Litigation, based in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, did not go off because two plaintiffs' attorneys settled their inventories.

Now, AmLaw Litigation Daily, an affiliate of The Legal, with a hat tip to Bloomberg for breaking the news, is reporting that the inventory settled 5,500 cases for $250 million, or an average of $46,000 each.

The settling attorneys were plaintiffs attorneys Joseph J. Zonies of Reilly Pozner in Denver, and Thomas Cartmell of Wagstaff & Cartmell in Kansas City, Mo..

The plaintiffs suing drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline over alleged injuries from their use of Avandia argue that it causes heart attacks, or myocardial infarctions, in diabetic patients taking the drug.