An interesting case involving a limitation of liability provision was recently appealed after a jury trial verdict for a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The plaintiff kept substantial assets in a safe deposit box at a bank.

Two motions for summary judgment were filed in the United States District Court, S.D. New York regarding an electrical fire in the maximum security prison Sing Sing. The motions involved determining whether there were enough fire safety precautions taken by the defendants and if the plaintiffs exhausted their administrative remedies.

A recent case in the United States Bankruptcy Court discusses a situation where a bankruptcy court refused to allow the party who had been discharged in bankruptcy from discharging the debt.

A case filed in the United States Court for the District of Kansas was notable not for the decision of dismissal rendered because the matter was not timely filed, but because of the court’s consideration of the allegations.

A recent case involving false alarm fees was heard and decided in Suffolk County, New York. The plaintiff, Suffolk County, sought to recover $800 from the defendants for alleged violations of the county code involving “false alarm fee assessments.”

A case involving a request for a preliminary injunction was recently heard in the United States District Court in Nebraska involving a question of what constitutes confidential information.

An issue recently arose in California where a police dog was used to seize and retrieve a suspect. The plaintiff fled into a thicket of bushes during a police chase.

A recent action was filed in the United States District Court of Nevada where the plaintiff, owner of a building, entered into a contract with the defendant alarm company’s predecessor for security services at the building, including monitoring alarms and dispatching responses to alarms. The contract was apparently subsequently assigned to the defendant alarm company.

In a recent New Jersey case, an insurance company appealed a trial court’s order of summary judgment that dismissed its subrogation claim against the defendant, the installer of the fire sprinkler at the premises.