April 25, 2007

Table of Contents

LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CONTRACTS, INJURY AND TORT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW, PROPERTY LAW & REAL ESTATE
• Otis Elevator Co. v. Midland Red Oak Realty, Inc.

CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE
• Reeves v. Churchich

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CONTRACTS, HEALTH LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW
• Zwygart v. Bd. of County Comm'rs of Jefferson County

You May FREELY Redistribute This E-Mail in Whole
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com.

LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CONTRACTS, INJURY AND TORT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW, PROPERTY LAW & REAL ESTATE
Otis Elevator Co. v. Midland Red Oak Realty, Inc., No. 04-6327
In a suit brought by an elevator service company against a glass company and property owner seeking indemnity for the amount of settling an underlying personal injury suit brought by an individual injured by broken glass, judgment for defendants is reversed and remanded where the district court erred in concluding that an indemnity provision in a repair order signed by defendants did not apply to the elevator car-top move of glass at issue. Read more...

CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE
Reeves v. Churchich, No. 04-4240
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 case arising from circumstances in which police officers were attempting to apprehend a domestic violence suspect and allegedly pointed their weapons at the suspect's neighbors and prevented them from leaving, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where the district court correctly found that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity as their conduct and actions did not violate plaintiffs' constitutional rights, and that there was no supervisor liability. Read more...

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CONTRACTS, HEALTH LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW
Zwygart v. Bd. of County Comm'rs of Jefferson County, No. 06-3084
In a suit brought by a former employee alleging that a county's actions in terminating him following open heart surgery violated his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)and the Due Process Clause, summary judgment for the county is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to introduce evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that he was disabled under the ADA; and 2) he failed to establish he had a protected property interest in his continued employment because he expressly agreed in a contract that his "immediate termination" would result from taking leave without pay, and the county did not waive its rights. Read more...