Case Summaries

[01/06] In Re: Smart World Techs., LLC
In the bankruptcy context, pre-approval of a fee agreement under 11 U.S.C. section 328(a) depends on the totality of the circumstances, including whether the professional's application, or the court's order, referenced section 328(a), and whether the court evaluated the propriety of the fee arrangement before granting final, and not merely preliminary, approval. In the circumstances of this case, the circuit court rules that: 1) the bankruptcy court's Retention Order was a pre-approval within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. section 328(a); and 2) no subsequent developments warranted modifying the terms of appellee-firm's retention.

[01/05] Episcopal Church Cases
In a property dispute arising after a parish disaffiliated itself from the Episcopal Church after the national church ordained an openly gay man as a bishop, a court of appeals decision reversing a ruling in favor of parish defendants is affirmed where: 1) the action was not subject to a special motion to strike under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (anti-SLAPP); and 2) on the merits and applying a "neutral principles of law" approach, the higher church authorities and not the parish defendants own the disputed property.

[12/29] People v. Roscoe
Following judgment finding defendants jointly and severally liable for penalties pursuant to laws governing underground storage of hazardous substances, judgment against defendant is affirmed where the responsible corporate officer doctrine applies to Health and Safety Code section 25299(a)(6) of the tank laws and thus subjects to liability as an "operator" a corporate officer who had "a responsible share in the furtherance of the transaction which the statute outlaws", even where the corporation itself was also found to be the operator.

More...

[01/06] In Re: Smart World Techs., LLC
In the bankruptcy context, pre-approval of a fee agreement under 11 U.S.C. section 328(a) depends on the totality of the circumstances, including whether the professional's application, or the court's order, referenced section 328(a), and whether the court evaluated the propriety of the fee arrangement before granting final, and not merely preliminary, approval. In the circumstances of this case, the circuit court rules that: 1) the bankruptcy court's Retention Order was a pre-approval within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. section 328(a); and 2) no subsequent developments warranted modifying the terms of appellee-firm's retention.

[01/06] CP Solutions PTE, Ltd. v. Gen. Elec. Co.
In a commercial contract dispute, dismissal of plaintiff's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is reversed and remanded where: 1) contrary to the district court's ruling, one of the defendants was not an indispensable party; and 2) thus, that defendant could be dropped as a party so as to preserve diversity jurisdiction.

[01/06] Edwards v. Kia Motors of Am., Inc.
Mutual release agreement between an auto dealer and the manufacturer, in which Plaintiffs relinquished all existing legal claims against the manufacturer for valid consideration, is enforceable and not prohibited by the Alabama Motor Vehicle Franchise Act. Plaintiffs' various common law claims were correctly dismissed because they do not fall within the limited exceptions to their release agreement.

More...