Racing to Res Judicata

When two or more lawsuits over the same set of facts are being resolved simultaneously in bankruptcy and state courts, figuring out who has jurisdiction over what can get tricky.  Yesterday, the Tennessee Court of Appeals issued a decision untangling a dispute between business partners that stretched between three different courts, and in doing so provided a helpful roadmap for resolving such disputes in the future. Spivey v. King, No. E2011-01114-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 2, 2012)

Read the full post    By Dan Lins    Tags bankruptcy litigation, business litigation, jurisdiction    Comments 0

Restrictive Covenant Lawsuit Dismissed for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

AmSurg Corporation sued a former division president, Frank Principati, in U.S. District Court in Nashville for allegedly violating a non-solicitation agreement with AmSurg. Judge Haynes dismissed the case without prejudice due to a lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendant. The case is Amsurg Corp. v. Principati, 2011 WL 780676 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 28, 2011).

Read the full post    By Bob Mendes    Tags business litigation, contracts, jurisdiction    Comments 0

Employment in the U.S. Is a Substantive, Not Jurisdictional, Requirement

In Rabe v. United Air Lines, Inc., 2011 WL 677946 (7th Cir. Feb. 28, 2011), the Seventh Circuit ruled that the defendant airline was basically too clever for its own good.

Ms. Rabe was a French citizen who worked for United Air Lines at the company’s hub in Paris. At the beginning of her employment, she signed an employment agreement stating that U.S. law would apply to her relationship with the company and would govern any dispute arising from it. So, when she was eventually terminated by United, Ms. Rabe sued in the Northern District of Illinois, claiming discrimination under Title VII and the ADEA.

Read the full post    By Michael Ewing    Tags employment law, jurisdiction    Comments 0

Fraudulent Joinder to Defeat Diversity Jurisdiction?

A Tennessee homeowner sued a Tennessee construction contractor and its Michigan insurer in Bradley County Chancery Court after a retaining wall fell and caused more than $80,000 in damage to the home and surrounding property. The Michigan insurance company removed the action to U.S. District Court and asserted that the court had diversity jurisdiction. Anticipating the argument that there was not complete diversity because the homeowner and contractor were both in Tennessee, the insurance company alleged that the contractor had been fraudulently joined as a defendant in order to defeat diversity jurisdiction. The district court disagreed and remanded the matter to state court.

Read the full post    By Bob Mendes    Tags jurisdiction, liability    Comments 0