NEW YORK — Sports broadcaster Warner Wolf filed an age discrimination complaint on Feb. 15 in a New York state court, his attorneys announced, against radio personality Don Imus and other former employers after he was abruptly fired and replaced with a sportscaster decades younger (Warner Wolf v. Don Imus, et al., No. N/A, N.Y. Sup., New York Co.).
ALBANY, N.Y. — The New York Court of Appeals on Jan. 3 heard oral arguments in an appeal filed by the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) in a dispute over whether the authority properly denied the petition of the son of a woman with dementia for permission to be added as a permanent occupant of his mother’s one-bedroom apartment (In the matter of the application of Jonas Aponte v. Shola Olatoye, et al., No. APL-20 16-00130, N.Y. App.).
LIMA, Ohio — Finding no abuse of discretion in a trial court’s decision to deny a brother’s request for an accounting of his sister’s time as their mother’s attorney-in-fact, an Ohio appeals court on Feb. 12 affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the allegations of abuse of the attorney-in-fact position (George Fetters v. Cathy Duff, No. 10-17-14, Ohio App., 3rd Dist., Mercer Co., 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 556).
NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on Jan. 22 refused to reconsider a July 24 ruling that granted PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP's (PwC) motion for judgment on the pleadings in an Employee Retirement Income Security Act class action, reaffirming that the plaintiffs failed to establish that they are entitled to relief under ERISA for their whipsaw claims (Timothy Laurent, et al. v. Pricewaterhouse Coopers LLP, et al., No. 06-2280, S.D. N.Y., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8995).
CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia on Feb. 9 upheld a trial court judge’s ruling dismissing a lawsuit challenging the execution of a woman’s will, holding that the suit was filed after the expiration of the six-month statute of limitations (Judy Mae Greer, et al. v. David Lynn Vandevender, et al., No. 16-1228, W.Va. Sup., 2018 W. Va. LEXIS 91).
ASHLAND, Ky. — A Kentucky federal judge on Feb. 7 sustained a nursing home’s motion to compel arbitration and enjoin a daughter from pursuing claims that poor care ultimately cost her father his life in state court or any manner other than arbitration, finding that the arbitration agreement signed by her father was binding (Diversicare Leasing Corp., et al. v. Rose Hutchinson, et al., No. 17-42, E.D. Ky., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19752).
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A woman’s failure to present any causation evidence demonstrating that misconduct by staff at a nursing home caused her mother’s death resulted in a federal judge in Kentucky’s Feb. 7 ruling to award summary judgment to the facility (Janice Colston v. Regency Nursing LLC, No. 16-cv-0050-GNS, W.D. Ky., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19757).
CHICAGO — A Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Feb. 6 reinstated a class suit accusing an insurance company of breaching its long-term care policy by doubling an insured’s premiums after she turned 67, ruling that the lead named plaintiff is entitled to relief on her contract claim and that, as a result, dismissal of the remaining claims was premature (Margery Newman, et al. v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, No. 17-1844, 7th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 2890).
TYLER, Texas — A Texas appeals court on Feb. 6 found that an interlocutory appeal of a judge’s decision granting a special appearance in a Texas lawsuit filed over guardianship was an appropriate remedy, finding that mandamus review was not warranted (In re: Margaret Fontaine, No. 12-17-00400, Texas App., 12th Dist., 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 1025).
CINCINNATI — A police lieutenant failed to show that his age caused his work restrictions and disproportionate suspension following a finding that he and several other police department officials had been deficient in performing their duties when they determined that an officer appropriately used force during an arrest, a Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Feb. 1 (Melvin Brown, Jr. v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, No. 17-5603, 6th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 2454).
LINCOLN, Neb. — An appeals court panel in Nebraska on Jan. 30 affirmed at trial court judge’s ruling that a man’s son and daughter should serve as his co-conservators, holding that he did not require a guardian and that the chosen co-conservators were the best options (In re: Guardianship and Conservatorship of Eugene A. Klein, No. A-17-568, Neb. App., Neb. App. LEXIS 19).
VALDOSTA, Ga. — A state court jury in Georgia on Jan. 25 awarded $7,621,200 in compensatory damages to the son and estate administrator of a man who died while living in a nursing home, finding that the facility and staff were negligent and breached the standard of care when they waited to take the man to the hospital (Gregory Copeland, et al., v. Lowndes County Health Services, LLC d/b/a Heritage Heathcare at Holly Hill, No. 2014CV287, Ga. State, Lowndes Co.).
MINNEAPOLIS — Honeywell filed a notice of appeal on Jan. 31 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, the same day a district court judge issued an amended opinion granting a motion for preliminary injunction filed by a class of retirees seeking to stop the termination of their health care benefits (Augustine Pacheco, et al. v. Honeywell International Inc., No. 17-5048, D. Minn., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15699).
NEW ORLEANS — A Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Jan. 30 overturned the conviction and sentencing of a doctor and home health care agency owner found guilty for conspiracy to commit health care fraud and health care fraud, holding that the government did not present sufficient evidence to support the jury’s findings (United States of America v. Pramela Ganji, et al., No. 16-31119, 5th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 2279).
PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania federal judge on Jan. 29 trimmed retaliation claims asserted under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act in a consolidated lawsuit over Allstate Insurance Co.’s reorganization that switched employee agents to independent contractors, finding that the retaliation claims that were based on Allstate’s counterclaims cannot proceed because the counterclaims were not objectively baseless (Gene R. Romero, et al. v. Allstate Insurance Company, et al., Nos. 01-3894, 01-6764, 03-6872, 15-1049 and 15-3047, E.D. Pa., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14160).
ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A Maryland woman who alleges that she was injured in two incidents while staying at a nursing home recovering for surgery may proceed in Maryland court with her negligence claim not alleged to be a “medical injury” and several other related claims, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled Jan. 19, partially reversing a ruling the Maryland Court of Special Appeals (Sheila Davis, et al. v. Frostburg Facility Operations, LLC, No. 12, Md. App.).
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — An Arkansas appeals court panel on Jan. 24 upheld a trial court judge’s ruling setting aside a will, finding that a woman who was named power of attorney of a man’s estate failed to rebut the presumption that she had undue influence in the creation of the document (Tami Darr v. Jean Billeaudeau, No. CV-16-917, Ark. App., 3rd Div., 2018 Ark. App. LEXIS 43).
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California on Jan. 23 ruled that a man’s lawsuit accusing a health maintenance organization (HMO) of failing to offer coverage for acute rehabilitation services following his stroke is not preempted by the Medicare Act because the allegations do not ask the court to apply principles of California law that are inconsistent with Medicare standards (Bernard Inchauspe v. SCAN Health Plan, et al., No. 17cv06011, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 216110).
JOHNSTOWN, Pa. — After noting that Pennsylvania law prohibits an award of punitive damages on a wrongful death claim, a federal judge in the state on Jan. 24 granted a nursing home’s motion to dismiss the request in relation to a former resident but declined to dismiss the estate’s request for punitive damages on other claims as premature (Eugene C. Rowles v. GGNSC Altoona Hillview LP, et al., No. 3:17-cv-22, W.D. Pa., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11245).
LOS ANGELES — A California appellate panel on Jan. 29 “swipe[d] left” and reversed a trial court’s ruling for Tinder Inc., finding that the lower court erred when it ruled that the dating application company did not violate the Unruh Act or California’s unfair competition law (UCL) by charging older users more for its premium service than younger users (Allan Candelore v. Tinder, Inc., No. B270172, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 3, 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 71).