Federal diversity jurisdiction is established where 1) the opposing parties to a lawsuit are citizens of different states and 2) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.1 To successfully remove a state court action to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, defendants must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional amount where plaintiffs have failed to plead the specific amount of damages and represents to a court that the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000.2 ... Continue Reading
Employers, human resources professionals, claims representatives, and their attorneys have much to consider upon receiving notice of an alleged on-the-job injury. There are many factors to examine during the initial investigation of the claim before the decision to accept or deny the claim should be reached. This article will discuss several of these considerations in detail with the goal of providing some suggestions as to possible avenues of investigation prior to the acceptance or denial of the claim. ... Continue Reading
It's hard to imagine anything in today's world that has not been impacted by COVID-19. The legal profession is, of course, no exception. Lawyers must be prepared each day to respond and adjust to the shifting sets of challenges presented by the coronavirus pandemic. The goal for each attorney should be to provide excellent legal services while ensuring that everyone involved stays healthy and safe. For depositions during this time, we feel that this goal is most effectively accomplished via remote video conferencing. ... Continue Reading
A significant factor to consider when evaluating a case, in particular for purposes of settlement, is whether the opposing party intends to utilize expert witnesses. The inclusion or exclusion of opposing party's expert witness in some instances may make or break a case. The lack of an expert witness such as an economist may prohibit a plaintiff from proving future lost income which would significantly diminish the value of the case. Or failing to disclose a orthopedist as a testifying expert may preclude an injured plaintiff from establishing causation. Alternatively, the use of such expert witnesses by the plaintiff may significantly strengthen their case and convince you or your client that settlement is more advantageous than proceeding to trial. The use of an expert witness becomes even more important when the other side intends to use one. There are countless instances where juries put undue weight on the testimony of an expert merely because the other side failed to present similar testimony to rebut the expert's opinion. This makes the disclosure of an expert witness critical for evaluating a case for settlement. ... Continue Reading
Change of Condition vs. Fictional New Injury: A review of AZ Atlanta et al. v. Surge Staffing, LLC, et. al.
The Workers' Compensation Act is most successful in its application when an injured worker receives all necessary and related medical treatment needed to return the employee back to his pre-injury state that allows him to pursue gainful employment. Ideally, the employee's condition is restored so far as he is capable of performing the same pre-injury work duties for the same employer. ... Continue Reading
The Journal is a publication for the clients of Drew Eckl & Farnham, LLP. It is written in a general format and is not intended to be legal advice to any specific circumstance. Legal Opinions may vary when based upon subtle factual differences. All rights reserved.
H. Michael Bagley