You may forward this e-mail in its entirety.
Table of Contents
- Tiara Condo. Assoc., Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Cos.
- R.H. v. Plano Indep. Unified Sch. Dist.
- Rule v. Fort Dodge Animal Health, Inc.
- Barnes-Wallace v. San Diego
FindLaw's case summaries are copyrighted material and are not intended for republication without prior approval. You may, however, freely redistribute this e-mail in its entirety. To view the full-text of cases you must sign in
U.S. 11th Circuit, May 28, 2010
Tiara Condo. Assoc., Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Cos., No. 09-11718
In an action for breach of contract between an insurance broker and the association responsible for managing a condominium tower located on Singer Island, Florida, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed in part summary judgment for defendant, holding that plaintiff failed to offer evidence that any of the alleged errors made by defendant were intentional or made in bad faith. However, the court certifies the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: Does an insurance broker provide a "professional service" such that the insurance broker is unable to successfully assert the economic loss rule as a bar to tort claims seeking economic damages that arise from the contractual relationship between the insurance broker and the insured?
U.S. 5th Circuit, May 28, 2010
R.H. v. Plano Indep. Unified Sch. Dist., No. 09-40369
In plaintiff's appeal from the district court's denial of tuition reimbursement for private preschooling under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the order is affirmed where: 1) the school district discussed the potential harmful effects of plaintiff's placement in a special educational environment; 2) defendant considered whether plaintiff's Individualized Education Plan (IEP) could be satisfactorily implemented in a regular classroom; and 3) the lack of extended school year services was part and parcel of plaintiff's IEP, and he was thus required to give notice to defendant of his intent to reject the terms of his existing IEP.
U.S. 1st Circuit, June 02, 2010
Rule v. Fort Dodge Animal Health, Inc. , No. 09-1364
In plaintiff's putative class action suit against Weyth Corporation and its subsidiary, alleging that defendants had sold a heartworm medication for dogs without disclosing safety concerns revealed in initial testing and in subsequent use, a grant of defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to sate a claim is affirmed where: 1) recovery generally is not available under the warranty of merchantability where the defect that made the product unfit caused no injury to the claimant and the threat is now gone and nothing now possessed by the claimant has been lessened in value; and 2) plaintiff has suffered no economic injuries under 93A section 4.
U.S. 9th Circuit, June 03, 2010
Barnes-Wallace v. San Diego, No. 04-55732
In an action claiming that the Boy Scouts' lease of public lands for its headquarters, accompanied by the Boy Scouts' prohibitions on atheism and homosexuality, was unconstitutional, the Ninth Circuit certifies the following questions to the California Supreme Court: 1) Do the leases interfere with the free exercise and enjoyment of religion by granting preference for a religious organization in violation of the No Preference Clause in article I, section 4 of the California Constitution?; 2) Are the leases "aid" for purposes of the No Aid Clause of article XVI, section 5 of the California Constitution? and 3) If the leases are aid, are they benefiting a "creed" or "sectarian purpose" in violation of the No Aid Clause?
FindLaw includes summaries of all Supreme and Appellate Court slip opinions posted on the official Illinois Courts site. FindLaw summaries include opinions that have not yet been released for publication and may be subject to modification, correction or withdrawal. Check the Illinois Courts site to determine if a specific opinion has been released before relying on that case as precedent.
We value your comments! Please take a moment to tell us what you think by sending us an e-mail.
Click here to subscribe to a FindLaw Newsletter. To unsubscribe, click here.
For more information about advertising in FindLaw Newsletters, click here.