About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

Case Citations [1] (July 2019 - August 2020)

handle is hein.ali/relwtrts0334 and id is 1 raw text is: 



D.Mass.2019.  Cit. generally in disc. In a putative class action filed by third-party car-insurance
claimant, who sought to recover from insurer of motorist who damaged his vehicle for inherent
diminution in value-defined by the difference between the market value of a car immediately before
an accident and its market value post-collision after it was fully repaired-this court granted summary
judgment for insurer, holding that the state's standard automobile insurance policy did not provide
coverage for inherent diminution in value. The court rejected claimant's argument that, under the
Restatement of Torts, inherent diminution in value was a form of damage that was generally recoverable
in tort. Martins v. Vermont Mutual Insurance Company, 411 F.Supp.3d 166, 169.

D.N.M.2019.  Cit. generally in cases quot. in ftn. Consumer filed various claims against, among others,
seller of a discounted medical-benefit plan, alleging that an insurance broker, acting on behalf of seller,
repeatedly called and texted her cellular telephone number without her consent. This court denied in part
seller's motion to dismiss, holding, inter alia, that consumer stated a claim for civil conspiracy under
New  Mexico  law by alleging wrongful acts and a close relationship between seller and broker. The court
noted that the Supreme Court of New Mexico had been very willing to adopt the view of the
Restatement of Torts to assist in the development of new tort areas, and that it had adopted large swaths
of tort law from the Restatement Second of Torts. Mohon v. Agentra LLC, 400 F.Supp.3d 1189, 1239.




§ 13. Battery; Harmful Contact

Okl.2019. Cit. and quot. in conc. op., cit. in ftn. to conc. op. (general cite). Administrator of employee's
estate brought a wrongful-death claim against employer, alleging that defendant had required decedent
to unhook himself from a safety lanyard while performing roofing work, despite knowing that doing so
would result in decedent falling to his death, and that a state statute excluding substantially certain
injuries from its definition of an intentional tort in the context of workers' compensation claims was
unconstitutional. The trial court granted defendant's motion to dismiss. The court of appeals reversed
and remanded. This court vacated the opinion of the court of appeals and reversed and remanded the
opinion of the trial court, holding, inter alia, that defendant's conduct constituted an intentional tort
under Restatement Second of Torts § 8A based on defendant's substantial certainty that its conduct
would result in decedent's death. The concurring opinion observed that § 8A and Restatement of Torts §
13 reflected modern tort jurisprudence by including the substantially certain standard within
intentional torts. Wells v. Oklahoma Roofing & Sheet Metal, L.L.C., 457 P.3d 1020, 1030-1032.

                            COPYRIGHT ©2020 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 nearly 3,000 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:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most