An alarm company allegedly failed to obtain the required approvals before disarming a customer’s video surveillance system.

A plaintiff argued that the terms of an original alarm services agreement were immaterial because it wasn’t suing on the contract, but on tort and implied warranty theories.

Is an alarm company responsible for injuries sustained on a routine maintenance call?

A recent case in the state of Rhode Island dealt with the issue of when “the firefighter’s rule” applies. The plaintiff was a firefighter who filed a negligence action against a hospital and a security company. They, in turn, filed a motion for summary judgment claiming that the suit was barred by the firefighter’s rule. The Superior Court agreed with the defendants and granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The firefighter appealed.