A litigant who files a very aggressive lawsuit can sometimes slow down, rather than advance, his or her case. That is exactly what happened to a retired physician and his irrevocable trust, after they brought suit in Virginia Federal Court against five separate defendants in order to recover over $1 million allegedly defrauded from them. The case is Cook v. John Hancock Life Ins. Co. The dispute in the case arises out of the physician’s
Opinions vary, but most employment lawyers believe that they are not worth the effort and expense outside of special industries and unique circumstances. Many issues arise when employers seek to bind their employees to arbitration agreements. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that employee arbitration agreements must provide at least the same level of protections that employees would have under federal law. This means that they must be able to recover the same remedies (including
According to a recent ruling in a case of first impression arising out of the Norfolk Division of the Eastern District of Virginia, a defendant who is a citizen of the forum state cannot remove a diversity case to federal court, even if the defendant has not yet been served with formal process, because to hold otherwise would be “absurd.” In Campbell v. Hampton Bankshares, Inc., et al., two Virginia banks were sued by their
A female employee’s claim of retaliatory termination under Title VII was tossed out on a summary judgment motion because the supervisor who received the employee’s discrimination complaint was not the same person who was principally responsible for making the termination decision. The Federal Court’s decision was later affirmed by the Fourth Circuit in Balas v. Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. The case involved a claim by a former employee of Northrop Grumman Corporation (Huntington Ingalls Industries,
Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit clarified its position on whether or not district courts may consider extrinsic evidence in ERISA cases. In Helton v. AT&T, Inc., et al. (No. 11-2153, March 6, 2013), the Fourth Circuit confirmed that courts may consider evidence outside the administrative record, when necessary and appropriate, in order to determine whether a plan administrator abused its discretion. Cases brought under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act