SIGNIFICANT CASE LAW & DECISIONS
Mental Health | Civil Rights/Government Liability | Employment
Subrogation | Insurance Coverage

Mental Health

Heil v. Brown, 443 Pa. Super. 502, 662 A.2d 669 (1995)

Mental health facility does not owe a duty to warn an unidentified, unforeseeable third party.

Brown v. The Devereux, U.S. Dist. Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania) CA 94 3125. Parents and patient failed to show gross negligence or wrongful misconduct - summary judgment granted. (1991)

Szydlowski v. City of Philadelphia and Acme Markets, Inc., 134 F.Supp. 2d 636, (2001).

Summary Judgment granted on claims of Fourth Amendment violation, false arrest, false imprisonment and common law assault and battery.

Civil Rights/Government Liability

Boyd v. Southern Home Servs., Civil Action No. 94-3019, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1996 U.S. Dist. Lexis 6742, May 17, 1996, Decided, May 17, 1996, Filed; May 20, 1996, Entered.

Even though residential child care facility was heavily funded by the state and was closely regulated by the state department of human services, the facility did not engage in state action when it terminated an employee.

Sweeney v. Merrymead Farm and The Montgomery County Health Department, 799 A.2d 202, 972 Pa. Commonwealth 493 Montgomery County Health Department (June 7, 2002).

Montgomery County Health Department held immune from suit in multiple claims arising from e.coli exposure at Merrymead Farms. The county was dismissed by preliminary objection. The matter was confirmed by the Commonwealth Court prior to engaging in lengthy and protracted discovery.

Tittensor v. Merrymead Farm and The Montgomery County Health Department, C.A. No. 02-CV-8011, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18159 (September 9, 2003).

Plaintiffs did not set forth claims sufficient to support “State Created Danger.” Plaintiff tried to circumvent Commonwealth Courts affirmation of grant of preliminary objections on behalf of Montgomery County.

Thomas v. Larson, C.A. 00-999

Summary Judgment granted, defendant not state actor.

Employment

Maccord v. Christian Academy, Civil Action No. 96-5479, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1997 U.S. Dist. Lexis 1811, February 19, 1997, Decided, February 20, 1997, Filed; February 21, 1997, Entered

To the extent that a school promised to renew a teacher’s contract by using the word “tenure” in the teacher’s contract and despite claims for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing against the school, case dismissed by Motion for Summary Judgment.

Steffenino v. G.G.D., Jr., Inc., Civil Action No. 94-5333, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1995 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5083, April 17, 1995, Decided, April 17, 1995, Filed, Entered

The employer was entitled to the dismissal of the employee’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress because her claim was barred by exclusivity provision of the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act.

Subrogation

Mount Olivet Tabernacle Church v. Emerson Electric, 571 Pa. Co. 811 A.2d 565; Reargument denied - Cert denied U.S. Supreme Court June 2, 2003.

Spoliation of evidence - no duty to preserve fire scene. Verdict success of one million dollars.

Oxford Presbyterian v. Weil, 738 A.2d 1063, 1999 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2262 (Ps. Super. Ct. 1999).

Holy Cross Lutheran Church v. S. Kane & Sons, Inc., confidential settlement – ostensible agency – insurance company Bad Faith.

Insurance Coverage

Acceptance Ins. Co. v. Segal, Segal & Lieberman, Civil Action No. 93-0299, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1994 U.S. Dist. Lexis 329, January 14, 1994, Decided, January 14, 1994, Filed, Entered

An insurer had no duty to defend and indemnify a partnership where the police endorsement listed the individuals comprising the partnership as additional insureds without indicating that they were partners.

Acceptance v. Battersby Assocs., CA 97-5098, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1998 U.S. Dist. Lexis 17984, November 9, 1998, Decided, November 12, 1998, Filed

An insurance company had no duty to defend and indemnify an insured because based on the plain language of the insurance policy, the policy specifically excluded bodily injury caused by an assault and/or battery.

Altipenta, Inc. v. Acceptance Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 96-5752, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1997 U.S. Dist. Lexis 6879, May 13, 1997, Decided, May 14, 1997, Filed.

Assault and battery exclusion to liquor liability policy relieved insurance company from liability and duty to defend in the underlying case against the insured for personal injuries to patrons occurring at the hands of third party.

Agway Ins. Co. v. Goodville Mutual Casualty, 48 Fed. Appx 37; 2002.

Old Republic v. State Farm Ins. Co., United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, C.A. No. 00-CV-3030.

Successful on behalf of excess insurer in seeking reimbursement from primary homeowners and co-excess carrier. Underlying case involved quadriplegia of Marple Newtown wrestler.

Fink and Sosinovage v. Royal & Sun Alliance, Royal & SunAlliance wrongfully denied UM coverage for injuries and death caused by an uninsured third party based upon non-owned vehicle exclusion. Policy limit extended to liability limit and stacked.

Turner v. Church Mut. Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 95-3489, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 894 F.Supp. 191; 1995 U.S. Dist. Lexis 10858, August 1, 1995, Decided, August 1, 1995, Filed, Entered

Where a church van passenger was injured in an accident with another vehicle but driver of that vehicle was not at fault, the passenger had no claim for uninsured motorist coverage against the church’s insurer.

General Accident Ins. Co. v. American Ins. Co., CA-99-3869 – U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, decided 1/27/2000.

Excess insurer not obligated to contribute its proportionate share of defense costs.

Nationwide Insurance Company v. Campbell, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, C.A. No. 02-CV-7327.

Aardvark Child Care & Learning Center, Inc. v. Markel Insurance Company, United States District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12197 (E.D. Pa. June 23, 2003).