Mueller and Deterding Obtain Summary Judgment in St Louis County
In a significant legal victory, attorneys Amanda M. Mueller and David J. Deterding secured summary judgment in St. Louis County, defending the University of Missouri-St. Louis against serious allegations. The case involved plaintiff Jane Doe, who claimed she was sexually assaulted on campus by a masked assailant. Doe’s lawsuit targeted UMSL and two administrators, citing negligence in various forms. However, the defendants successfully argued their protection under sovereign and official immunity, highlighting the complexities of legal responsibility in cases of criminal acts. Discover the details of this pivotal case and its implications for campus safety and legal accountability.
Wilson and McCormick Prevail in Appeal in Seventh Circuit
In a significant legal victory, Tom Wilson and Silas McCormick successfully defended Southern Illinois University and its faculty against a former dental student’s appeal. The case, Eric Hlavacek v. Ann Boyle, D.D.S. et al., centered on claims of constitutional rights violations following the student’s academic dismissal. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit unanimously upheld the dismissal, emphasizing that the University had afforded the student adequate due process. This ruling not only reinforces the importance of due process in academic settings but also highlights the legal protections available to educational institutions. Read more to discover the full implications of this case!
Noce, Mueller, and Deterding Prevail in Appeal in Eighth Circuit
In a significant ruling, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of a case involving allegations of sexual abuse against a former school principal and the Logan-Rogersville R-VIII School District. The plaintiff, Adam Walker, argued that the Missouri Childhood Sexual Abuse Statute should apply to both the perpetrator and the school officials. However, the court determined that the statute does not extend to non-perpetrator defendants, marking a pivotal moment in legal interpretations of liability in sexual abuse cases. This decision could have far-reaching implications for similar cases in the future.
Murphy Prevails in Bench Trial
In a significant legal victory, Michael Murphy from HeplerBroom’s Springfield office successfully defended a client during a recent bench trial in Knox County, Galesburg, Illinois. This decision not only highlights Murphy’s expertise and dedication but also underscores the firm’s commitment to achieving favorable outcomes for its clients. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, the strategies and insights gained from this case could provide valuable lessons for both legal professionals and clients alike. Discover the details of this compelling trial and what it means for the future of legal defense in our latest article.
Kaufmann and Murphy Secure Dismissal of Employment Claim
In a significant legal victory, Stephen R. Kaufmann and Michael P. Murphy of HeplerBroom, LLC have successfully secured a dismissal of an employment claim against the City of Pekin and its police officers. The plaintiff alleged retaliation for exercising his rights to free speech and assembly under the Illinois Constitution. However, after thorough legal proceedings, the Circuit Court for the Tenth Judicial Circuit ruled in favor of the defendants, citing the statute of limitations and the absence of a private right of action. Discover the details behind this landmark decision and its implications for similar cases.
Dede Zupanci Prevailed Before Fourth District Court of Appeals
Dede Zupanci has once again demonstrated her legal prowess by prevailing in the Fourth District Court of Appeals in the significant medical malpractice case of Bettis v. Wade. The court upheld the trial court’s decisions, which included barring the plaintiff’s expert witnesses and granting a summary judgment in favor of HeplerBroom’s client. This ruling not only highlights the importance of expert testimony in establishing standard of care and proximate cause but also marks a notable victory for Ms. Zupanci, who has successfully navigated this complex case on appeal for the second time. Discover the details of this compelling legal battle!
Hepler, Bauer, Speciale, and Kuchar Defeat Plaintiffs’ Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment in Multi-Million Dollar Claim
In a significant legal battle, Larry Hepler, Beth Bauer, Andrew Speciale, and Tara Kuchar successfully defended Southcap Pipeline Company against Valero Marketing and Supply Company’s multi-million dollar claims. The Plaintiffs alleged violations of the Interstate Commerce Act regarding the return of over 400,000 barrels of crude oil. However, the trial court found that the Plaintiffs failed to prove their entitlement to any of the claimed barrels. Recently, their motion to alter the judgment was denied, as the court upheld its decision, emphasizing the lack of new evidence or preserved arguments. Discover the details of this compelling case!
Kowert And Deterding Prevail Before Illinois Fifth District Court Of Appeals
In a significant legal victory, David Kowert and David Deterding successfully represented Keller Construction before the Illinois Fifth District Court of Appeals in the case of Fillback v. Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission. The Court upheld the denial of benefits by the Commission, emphasizing the presence of contradictory medical evidence and testimony. This ruling not only reinforces the importance of thorough evidence evaluation in workers’ compensation cases but also highlights the expertise of Kowert and Deterding in navigating complex legal challenges. Discover how their arguments led to this pivotal decision and what it means for similar cases in the future.
Reda Obtained Summary Judgment, Affirmed on Appeal
In a significant legal victory, Michael Reda and Nicholas Bart successfully obtained summary judgment for their client, an architect, in a case involving an alleged injury at an assisted living facility. The plaintiff claimed negligence in the installation of grab bars and the design of the bathroom after suffering a back injury. However, the court found that the architect had adhered to all relevant codes and regulations, leading to a favorable ruling. Discover how the trial court’s decision was upheld by the Fifth District Court of Appeals and what it means for architectural liability in similar cases.
Magee and Aplington Obtained Summary Judgment for Client
In a recent case, attorneys Tom Magee and Kate Aplington achieved a significant victory for a hockey rink operator in St. Charles County. The plaintiff, who suffered a serious eye injury from a high sticking incident, claimed negligence against the rink for not controlling the game. However, the court ruled in favor of our client, highlighting the inherent risks of the sport and the absence of prior issues with the player involved. This case underscores the complexities of sports liability and the importance of understanding the risks athletes assume. Discover the full story behind this compelling legal battle!