About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [i] (July 2016 through April 2017)

handle is hein.ali/resndjmts0034 and id is 1 raw text is: JUDGMENTS 2D Generally D.Nev.2015. Cit. generally in sup. In an action against insurer that was brought by cyclist who was injured by driver and was assigned, pursuant to a settlement agreement, driver's employer's claims against its insurer for breach of the duty to defend employer, this court denied both parties' motions for summary judgment, holding that insurer was bound by the default judgment entered against employer, absent fraud, collusion, or unreasonableness, and that there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether the default judgment and subsequent settlement agreement were based on fraud or collusion. The court acknowledged that the Supreme Court of Nevada looked to the Restatement Second of Judgments for guidance, and predicted that, here, the Supreme Court of Nevada would preclude insurer from relitigating material findings of fact essential to the default judgment against employer. Andrew v. Century Sur. Co., 134 F.Supp.3d 1249, 1262, 1263. CHAPTER 2. VALIDITY OF JUDGMENTS Introductory Note Wis.2016. Intro Note quot. in diss. op. Defendant filed a motion to reopen and vacate a first-offense operating-while-intoxicated civil-forfeiture judgment entered against her in Wisconsin, claiming that the judgment was void for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because it should have been criminally charged as a second offense due to her prior conviction for driving while intoxicated in Minnesota. The trial court granted defendant's motion and voided the judgment. This court reversed and remanded with directions to reinstate the judgment, holding that the trial court lacked competency but retained subject- matter jurisdiction. The dissent argued that the judgment was void, noting that the distinction between subject-matter jurisdiction and competency remained unclear and confusing and had been applied inconsistently by courts, and that the Restatement Second of Judgments used the terms interchangeably. City of Eau Claire v. Booth, 882 N.W.2d 738, 761. TOPIC 1. NOTICE § 2. Adequate Notice S.D.N.Y.2016. Com. (a) cit. in case quot. in disc. and cit. in ftn. After worker who developed asbestosis sued insurance broker and others for allegedly conspiring to withhold information from the public regarding the dangers of asbestos inhalation, broker filed a motion in asbestos manufacturer's bankruptcy case, arguing that it was relieved of any liability for worker's claims by a release and channeling injunction in the order confirming manufacturer's Chapter 11 plan. The bankruptcy court A I For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.