Cases!
Soldano vs. O’Daniels Case
page 17
●
Bartender refused to call police or let someone use the phone
●
Family of the victim are suing the bartender and owner for not letting a third party use
the phone that might have prevented the shooting
●
Case disposition: the case got dismissed and the family appealed the court
●
Although a person may not have a duty to help another, in a case such as this, a person
has a duty not to hinder others who are trying to help.
●
Judge’s opinion: If someone doesn’t cause a problem they have no obligation to fix it,
revolting in moral sense
Miglino v bally total fitness
●
Facts:
when the employee collapse. The employer didn't do anything
●
No law require for an employee to help. Afraid if they do might cause further damage.
●
The business suffers liability if something happens, but employees are only protected if
they’re acting on
their scope of employment.
Fraserside v. Youngtek IRAC
●
Facts: 2 internet pornography businesses. P sued D for trademark and copyright violation.
●
Issue - does an Iowa court have personal jurisdiction over a Cypress-based Inc.?
●
Rule: General Personal Jurisdiction requires "continuous and systematic" contacts
●
Analysis: Youngtek has no offices, no employees, no phone numbers, etc. Clicks on its
passive website by Iowans don't do it.
●
Conclusion: Specific personal jurisdiction requires that P's injury arise from D's activities
in the state or uniquely or expressly directed toward the state.
Standard Fire Insurance vs. Knowles
Summary
:
●
Federal district courts have jurisdiction in cases where lawsuit exceeds $5 mill
●
-Knowles asked for less than $5 mill to keep case in state court Standard appealed and
brought case to Supreme Court
Issue
:
●
Can a stipulation of less than $5 mill remove case from Federal court?
Decision
:
●
Court dismissed the case - Knowles cannot speak for everyone else in a class action suit
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
●
a complaint must be non-conclusory; well-pleaded complaint requires to be supported by
allegations containing factual content wich leads to the conclusion gi
SEC vs. Ginsburg
●
Summary: Scott Ginsburg, CEO of Evergreen was in charge of aquiringEZ Corp. and
Katz Media
He "made phone calls" to brother and father, who bought shares and sold
them after aquisitions, making huge profits
●
Issue: Did Ginsburg communicate material, nonpublic information to brother and father?
●
Decision: Originally, judge concluded there wasn't sufficient evidence - SEC appealed
and RULING WAS REVERSED - Ginsburg was found guilty
Oxford Health Care vs. Sutter
Summary:
●
Class action lawsuit against Oxford; claim they did not make full/prompt payments to
doctors
●
claims were referred to arbitration who authorized case
●
Oxford filed motion to vacate arbitrators decision, saying he "exceeded his powers"
Issue:
●
After referring case to arbitration, can Oxford legally vacate arbitrators decision and
bring case BACK to federal court?
