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

Case Citations [i] (2016)

handle is hein.ali/resndacy0127 and id is 1 raw text is: AGENCY 2D Generally Ct.Fed.Cl.2015. Cit. generally in disc. Contractor filed a petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act against the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, alleging that he developed Guillain-Barre Syndrome as a result of the influenza vaccine he received while working in Afghanistan for the U.S. Department of Defense. This court denied plaintiff's motion to review a special master's decision to dismiss his petition, holding that plaintiff was not an employee of the United States, and thus was not eligible for compensation under the statute. The court rejected plaintiff's argument that the special master improperly consulted the Restatement Second of Agency, among other materials, explaining that using such materials was within the bounds of judicial notice as they contained commonly known information which did not need to be proven; and such research was necessary given the principle of stare decisis. Griffin v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 124 Fed.Cl. 101, 106, 107. D.Ariz.2010. Cit. generally in case quot. in sup. In a trademark dispute brought by car manufacturer against company that sold parts and services for preowned cars made by manufacturer, this court granted in part plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, holding that an enforceable settlement existed between the parties, and that questions of fact remained as to whether defendant was liable for breach of contract or breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing in connection with the settlement. In making its decision, the court relied on provisions of the Restatement Second of Contracts and the Restatement Second of Agency, noting that, absent controlling law to the contrary, Arizona courts generally followed the Restatements of the Law. BMW of North America, LLC v. Mini Works, LLC, 166 F.Supp.3d 976, 982. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS TOPIC 1. DEFINITIONS § 1. Agency; Principal; Agent C.A.10, 2016. Subsec. (1) quot. in case quot. in sup. In a dispute arising from a stranger-originated-life- insurance-policy scheme, insurer sued insured who purchased a policy on his own life through an insurance agency by means of a loan from investor, seeking to rescind the policy based on alleged misrepresentations in insured's application; investor intervened as a defendant. This court granted summary judgment for plaintiff on its rescission claim, rejecting defendants' argument that plaintiff waived its right to rescind the policy because the insurance agency, as plaintiff s agent, was responsible for inserting the inaccuracies into insured's application. Affirming, this court held that the insurance agency was not plaintiff's agent for imputation purposes. The court cited the definition of agency set forth in Restatement Second of Agency § 1 in reasoning that defendants did not identify any particular A L m 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