Jump to Navigation
Aggressively Pursuing Justice For Injury Victims HIR

Resources

Legal

Government

General

News

Search Engines

Case Summaries

Injury & Tort Law

[02/07] Getchell v. Rogers Jewelry
In a slip-and-fall action, summary judgment in the defendant's favor is reversed, where the plaintiff produced evidence from which a reasonable inference could be drawn that the dangerous condition was created by the negligence of the defendant or its employees, so that the defendant could be charged with notice of the dangerous condition.

[02/03] Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co. v. Roberts
In a suit brought by an insurer seeking a declaratory judgment that it was required to indemnify its insured for no more than 40 percent of a state court judgment because it had covered its insured for no more than 40 percent of the time in which the state court plaintiff was exposed to lead poisoning, the district court's judgment is: 1) affirmed in part, where it was correct in allocating the insurer's liability using the pro-rata time on-the-risk, and its decision to use the plaintiff's date of birth as the starting point for the period in which she was exposed to lead poisoning was sound; and 2) reversed in part, where the district court erred in holding the insurer liable for 24 months of coverage rather than 22, since under the insurance contract, coverage ended when the property was sold.

[02/02] Lore v. City of Syracuse
In a case alleging illegal retaliation against a city police officer under Title VII and the New York State Human Rights Law (HRL) because of her complaints of gender discrimination, the district court's judgment is: 1) affirmed in part where the city's arguments regarding the availability of reputation damages, evidentiary and instructional errors, and excessive damages for emotional distress presented no basis for disturbing the judgment; and 2) vacated in part where there was merit in plaintiff's contentions regarding the liability of the city's corporation counsel, and the district court erred in dismissing her principal gender discrimination claims under the HRL on the basis that she had suffered no materially adverse employment action.

[02/01] Maxton v. Western States Metals
In a suit alleging negligence and strict liability causes of action based on personal injuries as a result of working with metal products manufactured by the defendants and supplied to the plaintiff's employer, the district court's judgment in favor of the defendants on demurrers is affirmed, where: 1) the metal products involved were not inherently dangerous, and no other circumstances justified imposing liability on the defendants for the plaintiff's injuries under the component parts doctrine; 2) the plaintiff did not meet his burden of showing there was a reasonable possibility that the deficiencies in the complaint could be cured by amendment.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.

Proven Track Record | Houck, Ilardi & Regas

Proven Track Record | Houck, Ilardi & Regas

We are very honored that investigative reporter Dale Cardwell chose our law firm as the firm he would trust to handle personal injury cases.

Do I have a case? Helping You Make Informed Decisions About Your Case

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close
Areas of Practice

Houck Ilardi & Regas, LLC
Two Ravinia Drive, Suite 800
Atlanta, GA 30346
Phone: 770-392-6080
Toll Free: 888-447-3803
Fax: 770-392-6083
Map and Directions

AV Lexis-Nexis Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rated for Ethical Standards and Legal Ability Super Lawyers 2010 American Association For Justice | Member 2011

At the law offices of Houck Ilardi & Regas, we protect the rights of personal injury victims throughout the Atlanta metro area, including but not limited to Alpharetta, Athens, Austell, College Park, Columbus, Decatur, Douglasville, Duluth, East Point, Fairburn, Fayetteville, Forest Park, Gainesville, Hapeville, Jonesboro, Kennesaw, LaGrange, Lithonia, Macon, Georgia, Morrow, Newnan, Norcross, Peachtree City, Sandy Springs, DeKalb County, Fulton County, Clayton County, Cobb County, Gwinnett County, Rockdale County, Newton County, Henry County, Fayette County, Coweta County, Carroll County, Douglas County, Paulding County, Bartow County, Cherokee County, and Forsyth County, Georgia.

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | FirmSite® by FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters business.