About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2021 - April 2022)

handle is hein.ali/resctlw0160 and id is 1 raw text is: CONFLICT OF LAWS 2D Generally C.A.8, 2021. Cit. generally in case quot. in sup. Patient filed an individual complaint in multidistrict litigation against manufacturer of a medical device used during his surgery, alleging that the device caused him to develop a periprosthetic joint infection. After patient entered into a stipulation with manufacturer for dismissal of this action with prejudice in order to pursue his claims against manufacturer in Texas state court, the district court entered an order terminating this action and, years later, granted manufacturer's motion for a permanent injunction preventing patient from litigating his claims against manufacturer in state court on grounds of res judicata. This court reversed and vacated the injunction, holding that patient's claims in state court were not barred by claim preclusion under Texas law. The court explained that Texas law applied under Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws, because patient was injured in Texas and neither party had argued that another state had a more significant relationship to his claims. In re Bair Hugger Forced Air Warming Devices Products Liability Litigation, 999 F.3d 534, 539. D.Ariz.2021. Cit. generally in cases cit. in disc. Former clients brought a putative class action for claims of negligence and breach of fiduciary duty against former attorneys. On remand, this court, among other things, granted plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration, holding that plaintiffs shared sufficient common questions of law and fact such that reconsideration of the court's previous order denying class certification was warranted. In illustrating the litigation history of this instant case, the court noted that it previously denied class certification on the grounds that, under the Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws, class litigation would be unmanageable because it would need to apply the law of every state in which a putative plaintiff was domiciled, but the court of appeals found that the law of the forum state governed the claims of all plaintiffs. Bobbitt v. Milberg LLP, 338 F.R.D. 607, 615. N.D.Cal.2020. Cit. generally in case quot. in sup. Manager for professional singer, who was also singer's ex-husband, filed an action in Utah state court against singer and others, alleging defamation, breach of contract, and other claims in connection with singer's termination of his employment. After the action was removed and venue was transferred, this court granted in part defendants' motions to strike plaintiff's claims under California's anti-SLAPP statute and granted in part defendants' motions to dismiss, with leave to amend. The court concluded, among other things, that, under Utah choice-of-law rules, which followed the Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws, California law applied, and noted that manager was expected in any amended complaint to recognize that California law barred many of his previously pleaded claims. Mandel v. Hafemann, 503 F.Supp.3d 946, 960, 962. N.D.Ill.2021. Cit. generally in disc. Retired professional hockey players brought state-law claims for negligence, failure to warn, and misrepresentation against hockey league and board of governors, alleging that defendants knowingly encouraged a culture of fighting among players, despite knowing that such fights caused brain trauma. This court granted defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings on other grounds, holding, inter alia, that Pennsylvania and Massachusetts law governed plaintiffs' claims. Citing Restatement Second of Conflict of Laws, the court noted that, under caselaw, the state with the most significant contacts to each claim was determined by the state in which each COPYRIGHT ©2022 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most