Punitive damages against home improvement lender. A home
improvement lender must pay $1.5 million in damages in a class action for
making home improvement loans with knowledge of the contractor's fraud. The
Court of Appeals for Ohio held that disclosure is compulsory when a lender
knows fraud is being perpetrated on one of its unsophisticated customers
in a loan transaction and that making the loan would further the fraud. The
contractor targeted elderly people with built-up equity in their homes
because they would qualify for home improvement loans. He then steered the
homeowners to the lender. The lender should have suspended future
transactions with the contractor upon receiving adverse information about
his performance until an investigation was satisfactorily completed. The
jury awarded $15,000 in compensatory damages, $1.5 million in punitive
damages and attorneys fees for fraud, civil conspiracy, violation of the
Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act and breach of contract.
[top of page]
What's New in Debtor/Creditor Law?
Debtor may be disinherited. Bankruptcy estates include all
property inherited within 180 days of the filing of the petition. A mother
was able to keep her money away from her son's creditors by executing a
codicil shortly before her son filed bankruptcy that disinherited him if she
died less than 181 days after his petition was filed. The U.S. Bankruptcy
Court determined that it was in her prerogative to execute the codicil and
she had no duty to underwrite the creditors of her son's bankruptcy estate
(Mass. Adv. No. 96-1698).
[top of page]
What's New in Divorce/Family Law?
Ex-husband's estate must pay for college. The divorce
settlement required a couple to pay for their son's college education
commensurate with their income and assets. When the husband died, he left
none of his $10 million plus estate to his son. When the son was accepted
to a college eight years later, the ex-wife argued that the estate should
pay his tuition because the money in the estate far exceeded her income. The
estate was ordered to pay the college tuition because the divorce agreement
did not specify that this obligation terminated upon death (New Jersey
Supreme Court). Courts in Illinois, New Hampshire, Virginia, Utah and West
Virginia have similar rulings.
[top of page]
What's New in Estate Planning Law?
Retirement plan liable for failure to warn. A retired
employee can sue a retirement plan for not warning him that he could never
change the beneficiary of his joint and survivor annuity. Shortly after
naming his wife as beneficiary, he was divorced and wanted to name his new
wife instead. Since his marriage was shaky at the time he retired, he
claimed that he would not have named his ex-wife as beneficiary if he had
known that he could not change the designation (U.S. Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit).
[top of page]
What's New in Health Law?
Involuntary sterilization is a civil rights violation. A
retarded woman who was involuntarily sterilized 20 years ago at the age of
16 can sue her parents, the hospital and doctors under the 1871 Ku Klux Klan
Act, a statute aimed at those who conspire to violate the civil rights of
certain classes. Although the statute was enacted to combat lynchings and
other violent acts against recently freed slaves by whites, especially the
Klan, the Supreme Court has applied it to otherwise class-based, invidiously
discriminatory animus (Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 112f. 3rd
682).
[top of page]
What's New in Landlord/Tenant Law?
Landlord liable for discrimination even though unaware of disability. A
tenant was evicted for failing to cooperate with pest extermination. He claimed
he was depressed and needed a "reasonable period of accommodation" to prepare
for the exterminators. Even though the landlord did not know about the tenant's
mental disability at the time the eviction notice was sent, it can be sued under
the Fair Housing Act where it learned about the disability before the tenant
was actually evicted. The act is violated when housing is "denied" by actual
eviction because of a handicap (U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit).
[top of page]
What's New in Personal Injury Law?
$157,000 award for rottweiler attack. A retired truck owner
and operator was walking his pet poodle near his home. When a 120 pound
rottweiler attacked, he put his arm up to protect himself from the dog and
was knocked to his knees. The rottweiler then attacked the poodle. He stabbed
at the attacking dog with a six inch knife which barely phased the
dog. Another neighbor shot the dog to death with a pistol. The Plaintiff
claimed that his lower arm was numb for two years after the attack. The
poodle had scars on both sides of his neck (Pierce County, Washington
Superior Court).
$11.5 million award against gun seller. A store which sold
a gun to a drunken man who shot his girlfriend is liable for $11.5 million
for negligent entrustment. Selling a gun to an intoxicated person presents a
foreseeable risk of harm. The gun buyer had consumed a fifth of whiskey and
case of beer during the day. Although the store clerk indicated that the
buyer did not appear intoxicated, he had to help him fill out the federal
firearms form because his handwriting was illegible (Florida Supreme Court).
[top of page]
What's New in Real Estate Law?
Rehab center sues under ADA. A drug and alcohol treatment
center which was denied a building permit can sue under the Americans With
Disabilities Act (ADA). The treatment center applied for a building permit
in a "mixed-use" retail and residential district. The building commissioner
granted the permit because the center qualified as a business or professional
"office" under the city's zoning ordinance. However, the zoning board revoked
the permit after residents and local shop owners protested that the center
would lower property values and attract a bad element. The board found that
the rehab center was really a "clinic", not an "office", even though it did
not hold a hearing or issue a written opinion. The treatment center sued on
the basis that a zoning decision is a government "service, program or
activity" within the meaning of the ADA. The U.S. Court of Appeals, Second
Circuit, in affirming a preliminary injunction, held that the ADA clearly
encompasses zoning decisions because they are a normal governmental
function. Therefore, the zoning board cannot base a decision on "stereotypes
and generalized fears about drug- and alcohol-dependent people". In affirming
the injunction, the court felt that the center was likely to succeed on the
merits of this claim because: (a) the board's decision was clearly based on
hostility and animus towards drug- and alcohol-dependent people; (b) the
board did not defer to the commission who originally approved the permit;
and (c) other mental illness professionals were located in the area where
the treatment center wanted to move.
[top of page]
What's New in Small Business Law?
New EEOC rules for job interviews. It is illegal to ask any
questions about the applicant's job-related injuries or worker's compensation
history. It is legal to ask "Can you meet our attendance requirements?" or
"How many days were you absent last year?". But, it is illegal to ask "How
many days were you sick last year?". It is legal to ask questions about
"impairments" that do not arise to the level of a disability such as "How
did you break your leg?" but, it is illegal to ask "Do you expect the leg to
heal normally?" or "Do you break bones easily?". It is also illegal to ask
the general question, "What impairments do you have?".
[top of page]
Injured Victims' Rights
The Friedman & Ranzenhofer, P.C. Ten Point Pledge to Accident/Injury Clients is:
- To communicate with you in plain language that is easy to understand.
- To promptly return your telephone calls.
- To quickly and thoroughly investigate and analyze your case. Friedman & Ranzenhofer, P.C. does not accept every accident case.
- To have your case personally handled by an attorney.
- To keep you informed of the progress of your case at all times.
- To show you the personal care, concern and attention which has been the hallmark of our law firm since 1955.
- To not handle your case in an "assembly line" fashion.
- To accommodate the needs of you and your family during the handling of your case.
- To vigorously protect your legal rights.
- To never release your name to the media after your case has been completed, except with your written permission.
Attorney Michael H. Ranzenhofer limits his practice to automobile accident, slip and fall, dog bite and defective product cases. He is a member of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, the Western New York Trial Lawyers Association, the New York State Trial Lawyers Association and the Erie County Bar Association Negligence Committee.
[top of page]
