Category Archives: Uncategorized

Help Me Help You – How Working With Claimant’s Counsel Can Maximize Your Lien Recovery; “Part One: We Are the Necessary Evil”


This entry was posted by on .

In the most recent episode of the Subro Sessions Podcast, Brett Tishler and Michael Abed of the Subrogation Department discuss workers’ compensation subrogation, what it is and why helping the injured worker’s counsel pursue a third party claim can maximize your lien recovery.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Podcast, Subrogation, Uncategorized and tagged .

Samsung Recalls Top-Load Washing Machines Due to Fire Hazard


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control.  On December 22, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Samsung Recalls Top-Load Washing Machines Due to Fire Hazard; Software Repair Available.

According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he washing machines can short-circuit and overheat, posing a fire hazard.”

Product images from the CPSC website are set forth below:

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability, Uncategorized and tagged .
Signing Agreement

Family Matters: United States District Court Extends Sutton Rule to Undefined “Family”


This entry was posted by on .

In Am. Reliable Ins. Co. v. Addington., No. 3:21-CV-00848, __ F.Supp.3d __, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218436, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee (the District Court) considered whether a tenant’s live-in partner and the partner’s adult son constituted a “family” in the underlying lease and, thus, were implied co-insureds under the Sutton Rule. The District Court determined that the arrangement did constitute a “family” and that the Sutton Rule barred subrogation.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Landlord-Tenant, Sutton Doctrine, Tennessee, Uncategorized and tagged , .
Recall Alert

Consumer Product Safety Commission Recalls


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control.  On December 15, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recalls related to products that present fire hazards:

  1. E-Bikes Recalled Due to Fire and Burn Hazards; Distributed by Gyroor (Recall Alert). According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he e-bike’s battery pack can ignite, posing fire and burn hazards.”
  2. Advantage Sales & Marketing Recalls Good Matters Three-Wick Candles Due to Fire and Laceration Hazards. According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he candles can burn at higher than usual temperatures causing the jars to break, posing fire and laceration injury hazards.”
  3. ESS Universal USA Recalls Mattresses Due to Violation of Federal Flammability Standard for Mattresses; Fire Hazard (Recall Alert). According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he mattresses fail to meet the mandatory federal flammability standard for mattresses, posing a fire hazard.”
This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability, Uncategorized and tagged .
Gavel

Supreme Court of Illinois Clarifies Who Qualifies as a Co-Insured


This entry was posted by on .

The Supreme Court of Illinois (Supreme Court) reversed a 2021 appellate court decision which held that an insurer had to duty to defend the property owner’s tenant following a fire at the property.  In Sheckler v. Auto-Owners Insurance Co., 2022 IL 128012, the state’s highest court ruled that the appellate court’s reliance on Dix Mutual Insurance Co. v. LaFramboise, 597 N.E. 2d 622 (Ill. 1992) was misplaced as the ruling in Dix was limited to a specific set of facts, which did not apply to the current case.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Anti-Subrogation Rule, Illinois, Implied-Co-Insured, Landlord-Tenant, Sutton Doctrine, Uncategorized and tagged , , .
Product Recall

Spirit Halloween Recalls Black Light Fixtures


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On June 9, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Spirit Halloween Recalls Black Light Fixtures Due to Fire and Burn Hazards.

According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he bulb in the fixture can pop, flash and overheat, posing fire and burn hazards.”

Product images from the CPSC website are set forth below:

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability, Uncategorized and tagged .
Gavel

Personal Jurisdiction: SCOTUS to Decide if Registration by Out-of-State Corporations Confers General Jurisdiction


This entry was posted by on .

On April 25, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari of a case in which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that an out-of-state corporation’s mere registration to conduct business within the Commonwealth did not subject the foreign company to general personal jurisdiction in Pennsylvania. In Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, 266 A.3d 542 (Pa., December 22, 2021), the unanimous, bipartisan Pennsylvania Supreme Court exhaustively analyzed the history, nature and extent of general personal jurisdiction. In light of the past decade’s U.S. Supreme Court rulings on personal jurisdiction, the Pennsylvania Court believed that the legislative “scheme of conditioning the privilege of doing business in the Commonwealth on the submission of the foreign corporation to general jurisdiction in Pennsylvania courts strips foreign corporations of the due process safeguards guaranteed” by the U.S. Constitution. In so holding, Pennsylvania joined the wide majority of courts in sister states which had ruled similarly.

Continue reading

This entry was posted in Uncategorized.
Recall Alert

SOUNDBOKS Recalls Bluetooth Speakers with Lithium-Ion Batteries


This entry was posted by on .

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On March 31, 2022, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

SOUNDBOKS Recalls Bluetooth Speakers with Lithium-Ion Batteries Due to Fire Hazard (Recall Alert).

According to the CPSC’s website, “[t]he lithium-ion battery can overheat, posing a fire hazard.”

This entry was posted in CPSC Recalls, Products Liability, Uncategorized and tagged .
Gavel

Idaho District Court Affirms Its Role as the Gatekeeper of Expert Testimony


This entry was posted by on .

Many subrogation claims involving fire losses rely heavily on expert testimony. Expert testimony is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 if it is both relevant and reliable. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), whose standard has been incorporated into Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Supreme Court instructed federal trial courts to act as a “gatekeeper” of expert testimony, giving them the power to exclude expert testimony that is not supported by sufficient evidence. In Maria Fernanda Elosu and Robert Luis Brace v. Middlefork Ranch Incorporated, Civil Case No. 1:19-cv-00267-DCN, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14449 (D. Idaho Jan. 22, 2021) (Brace), the United States District Court for the District of Idaho exercised its gatekeeper role when it granted in part and denied in part the defendant’s motion to exclude expert testimony pursuant to Daubert and Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Continue reading

This entry was posted in Experts, Idaho, Uncategorized and tagged .

Strictly Speaking, the Plaintiff’s Fault Matters in Products Liability Actions in Georgia


This entry was posted by on .

Many states, finding that the purpose of the strict liability doctrine is to protect otherwise defenseless victims from defective products, hold that principles of comparative negligence do not apply to strict liability actions. Georgia is not one of those states. In Johns v. Suzuki Motor of Am., S19G1478, 2020 Ga. LEXIS 760, the Supreme Court of Georgia recently held that Georgia’s comparative fault statute, OCGA § 51-12-33, applies to strict products liability claims brought pursuant to Georgia’s product liability statute, OCGA § 51-1-11. Continue reading

This entry was posted in Comparative-Contributory Negligence, Georgia, Negligence, Products Liability, Uncategorized and tagged , , , .