SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California federal judge on April 20 dismissed with prejudice an elderly man’s claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) against Mutual of Omaha because the man has not identified “any extreme and outrageous conduct” by the defendant (Donald Mann v. Mutual of Omaha, et al., No. 16-2560, E.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60579).
JACKSON, Miss. — The Mississippi Supreme Court on April 20 affirmed the judgment of a chancery court granting grandparent visitation rights with a couple’s two grandsons, agreeing with the chancellor that visitation was appropriate and in the children’s best interests (Brandon Smith, et al. v. Milton Martin, et al., No. 2014-CT-00040, Miss. Sup., 2017 Miss. LEXIS 151).
LOS ANGELES — A California appeals panel on April 13 upheld dismissal of elder abuse and other claims against Bank of America entities over the sale of an elderly woman’s house, saying she lacked standing to bring her causes of action (Parvin Jamali v. Bank of America Home Loans, No. B256199, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 5, 2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2577).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A Connecticut federal judge on April 19 certified a class of retirees in a suit filed by an employer seeking a court declaration that a union has the authority to agree to changes in retiree medical benefits for those persons who retired after a 1996 class action settlement that provided the retirees with medical benefits without violating federal law (Barnes Group, Inc. v. International Union United Automobile Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, et al., No. 16-559, D. Conn., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59761).
CHICAGO — The American Dental Association (ADA) has agreed to pay $1.95 million to settle two discrimination charges, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced April 21.
MONTGOMERY, Ala. — The Alabama Supreme Court on April 14 reversed and remanded a county court ruling that a man is an adult in need of protective services, saying that the man’s testimony about his ability to live at home and to take care of himself, as well as testimony regarding his preference to remain in his home, was sufficient to establish a genuine issue of material fact (Jerry Nix v. Franklin County Department of Human Resources, No. 1160494, Ala. Sup., 2017 Ala. LEXIS 35).
ST. PAUL, Minn. — Thirty-three laid-off General Mills Inc. workers must have their age discrimination claims decided in arbitration individually, and not as a class, and they are not entitled to declaratory judgment regarding their rights under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) because the judgment would not resolve their claims, the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held April 14 (Elizabeth McLeod, et al. v. General Mills, Inc., et al., No. 15-3540, 8th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6422).
RUTLAND, Vt. — A Vermont federal judge on April 5 held that physicians and other health providers lack jurisdictional standing to challenge the constitutionality of Vermont’s Patient Choice and Control at End of Life Act in the absence of any possibility of imminent harm (Vermont Alliance For Ethical Healthcare, Inc., et al. v. William K. Hoser, in his official capacity as chair of the Vermont Board of Medical Practice, et al., No. 5:16-cv-205, D. Vt., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51699).
CAPE GIRARDEAU, Mo. — A Missouri federal judge on March 30 granted a summary judgment motion filed on behalf of new Health and Human Services Secretary Thomas E. Price and dismissed a case against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) because the plaintiff did not exhaust all of her administrative remedies under the Medicare Act (Nikkco L. Fortner v. Thomas E. Price, et al., No. 1:16-cv-279, E.D. Mo., Southeastern Div., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47581).
TRENTON, N.J. — A New Jersey appeals court on March 28 settled a dispute among three brothers over the care and legal guardianship of their mother and the disposition of her assets when she dies, finding that one son has a valid power of attorney while another is the sole beneficiary of a Transfer on Death (TOD) account he set up with their mother 20 years ago and did not tell his brothers about (In the matter of Evelyn Worley, an incapacitated person, Dwight Worley and Daniel Worley v. Richard Worley, No. A-0154-15T2, N.J. Super., App. Div., 2017 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 753).
BOSTON — A Massachusetts federal judge on March 28 granted a motion to dismiss federal claims that defendants involved in two sisters’ father’s estate planning and medical care engaged in breach of fiduciary duty, fraud and fraudulent conspiracy, saying that they are time-barred and fail to state a claim (Lisa Siegel Belanger, et al. v. BNY Mellon Asset Management LLC, et al., No. 15-cv-10198, D. Mass., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45526).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on March 27 denied review of a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts state law requiring the consolidation of wrongful death and survival actions for trial in a case where an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) agreement required arbitration of claims against a nursing center stemming from a resident’s stay at the center (Taylor v. Extendicare Health Facilities, Inc., No. 16-825, U.S. Sup., 2017 U.S. LEXIS 2106).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A former general manager for Abbott Laboratories asked the U.S. Supreme Court March 27 to review the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ affirmance of dismissal of his federal and state age discrimination claims against the company (Clive Baron v. Abbott Laboratories, No. 16-1186, U.S. Sup., 2017 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1192).
HONOLULU — After nearly three hours of testimony, Hawaiian lawmakers on March 23 put off acting on the proposed Medical Aid in Dying bill, S.B. No. 1129, because of lack of specifics.
MIAMI — A Florida federal judge on March 23 granted the Department of Health and Human Service’s (HHS) summary judgment motion, saying that the HHS’s Medicare Appeals Council (MAC) correctly ruled that the Medicare secondary payer statute (MSP) allows the HHS to recover the full amount of money it paid in conditional payments from the date of an accident through the date of settlement (Barbara Shapiro v. Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services, No. 15-22151, S.D. Fla., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42278).
HARRISBURG, Pa. — A Pennsylvania court on March 22 threw out a lawsuit brought by the state attorney general’s office alleging that a nursing home chain misrepresented the level of care it provides, saying that statements the company made in its marketing materials were “puffery,” not false advertising under state law (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Golden Gate National Senior Care LLC, et al., No. 336 M.D. 2015, Pa. Cmwlth., 2017 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 84).
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A Florida appeals court on March 20 granted the governor’s writ of prohibition and quashed a trial court’s order denying dismissal of the governor from an action filed by a former nursing home resident challenging the constitutionality of state laws limiting the parties that can be sued in negligence actions brought by nursing home residents (Rick Scott v. Gail Francati, No. 1D16-3942, Fla. App., 1st Dist., 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3663).
ORANGE, Calif. — A California appeals panel on March 17 reversed a state court judge’s ruling sustaining a demurrer to an elder abuse claim and remanded the case, saying the plaintiff properly stated a cause of action for elder abuse (Arlayne Hoover, et al. v. Manor Care of Fountain Valley CA LLC, et al., No. G052626, Calif. App., 4th Dist., Div. 3, 2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1942).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court grappled April 17 with a statutory scheme for federal workers who challenge employment decisions that is designed to prevent claim splitting and to streamline the judicial process for often pro se litigants but that Justice Samuel Anthony Alito Jr. called “unbelievably complicated” when it comes to deciding what court should hear “mixed cases” involving both civil service claims and discrimination claims (Anthony W. Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Board, No. 16-399, U.S. Sup.).
ATLANTA — The Georgia Court of Appeals on March 14 held that a probate court did not err in refusing to approve a conservator’s asset management plan because the conservator failed to document the expenses as requested by the probate court and that there was some evidence to support the probate court’s finding that the conservator withdrew more than $80,000 in payments to himself on the eve of his suspension and failed to account for at least $167,000 in funds belonging to the ward (In re Estate of Jacqueline Gladstone, Nos. A16A1682, A16A1683, Ga. App., 2017 Ga. App. LEXIS 129).