Case Summaries

Health Law

[12/31] Haybarger v. Lawrence County Adult Prob. & Parole
In a case alleging violations of both federal and state antidiscrimination laws, plaintiff's employer is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity from her Rehabilitation Act claim. Although the employer does not receive federal funds, it is one of many subunits of the Fifty-Third Judicial District, one of which receives federal funds.

[12/31] Emenaker v. Peake
Decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to deny veteran's request for benefits attributable to a service-connected disability stemming from a neurological disorder is affirmed because veteran failed to raise his present argument in the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in the first instance, and had therefore failed to preserve the issue for appeal.

[12/29] Owen v. Astrue
Denial of Social Security disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income is affirmed where: 1) an ALJ did not err in balancing the medical evidence in the record or in finding that the treating physician's RFC assessment was not entitled to controlling weight because it was contradicted by the medical record and internally inconsistent; and 2) there was no evidence that the drowsiness claimant experienced as a result of his medication was uncontrollable or restricted his ability to work.

More...

Elder Law

[12/05] AutoZone, Inc. v. Reyes
In an age-discrimination suit, jury verdict for plaintiff is reversed where: 1) the statements of a store manager were not evidence that age was a motivating factor in defendant's termination of plaintiff; and 2) defendant claimed, as a non-discriminatory reason for terminating plaintiff, that plaintiff had violated its sexual harassment policy, and plaintiff presented no evidence under which a reasonable jury could find that defendant treated him less favorably than any other employee who had violated that policy.

[11/12] James v. Richman
In a suit seeking Medicaid benefits, an injunction preventing defendant-Department of Public Welfare from denying benefits is affirmed where: 1) equitable relief was appropriate where plaintiff would be barred by the Eleventh Amendment from seeking monetary damages from the state; 2) plaintiff was not required to exhaust his state-level administrative remedies before seeking federal relief; and 3) a non-revocable, non-transferable annuity purchased by plaintiff's wife did not fit the statutory definition of an "available resource" for purposes of calculating Medicaid eligibility.

[06/07] Rath v. Carbondale Nursing and Rehab. Center, Inc.
Judgment for plaintiff on a claim for damages pursuant to the Nursing Home Care Act alleging various negligent acts by the defendant is affirmed where: 1) testimony as to defendant's negligence was proper even though defendant admitted to various acts of negligence since the information was relevant beyond the conclusions conceded by defendants; and 2) the fee award was reasonable in light of the contingency fee arrangement.

More...

Probate Trusts

[12/31] Boys and Girls Club of Petaluma v. Walsh
Probate court's modification of a charitable trust in 2007 pursuant to Probate Code section 15403 is affirmed where: 1) "all beneficiaries" of the charitable trust consented to the modification in accordance with section 15403(a); and 2) the broad discretion conferred up on the trustees did not constitute a "material purpose" which would prevent a probate court from modifying the charitable trust pursuant to section 15403(b).

[12/29] Estate of Shellenbarger
Denial of petition to exclude natural father's entitlement to distribution in decedent's estate is affirmed where a probate court may not, on principles of equity, disinherit a natural parent who abandons a child who later dies intestate.

[12/22] Estate of Bowles
Dismissal of plaintiff's civil complaint and order denying plaintiff's first amended Probate Code section 17200 petition are reversed where: 1) plaintiff had standing; 2) plaintiff's allegations brought him within the rule that a trust beneficiary can pursue a cause of action against a third party who actively participated in or knowingly benefits from a trustee's breach of trust; 3) the civil complaint was not a probate matter under section 17200; but 4) the civil complaint was related to the section 17200 petition and whether the related civil complaint should be heard in the probate court must be resolved pursuant to local superior court rules; and 5) the probate court erred in dismissing plaintiff's first amended section 17200 petition.

More...