NEW YORK – JPMorgan Chase Bank NA on Feb. 1 agreed to pay nearly $ 700 million to bankrupt Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LBHI) that JPMorgan had been previously paid for “purportedly secured claims against LBHI on the basis that, as ‘affiliates’ of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., their claims were guaranteed by LBHI” under a September 2011 guaranty and secured by collateral posted by LBHI “in connection therewith,” according to a motion for approval of settlement filed in New York federal bankruptcy court (In re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., et al., No. 08-13555, Chapter 11, S.D. N.Y. Bkcy.).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – A jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on Jan. 30 found that a Florida property manager insured incurred $ 4 million in covered losses from Hurricane Wilma, rendering a verdict against the excess insurer following a 10-day trial (Banta Properties Inc. v. Arch Specialty Insurance Company, No.10-61485, S.D. Fla.).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

NEW YORK – A New York federal judge on Jan. 25 entered a final judgment of $ 9,351,247,965.99 against Al Qaeda and in favor of 23 insurers after adopting a magistrate judge’s finding that the insurers are entitled to treble damages under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) for any claims that they reasonably paid to insureds who suffered business and property damage as a result of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (In Re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, No. 03 MDL 1570 [GBD] [FM], S.D. N.Y.).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

SAN FRANCISCO – Because Thorpe Insulation Co.’s Chapter 11 plan of reorganization could harm insurance companies, the plan is not “insurance neutral” and, therefore, the insurers have standing to object to it, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held Jan. 24 in reversing approval of the plan and remanding the case so the insurers’ arguments can be heard (Motor Vehicle Casualty Company, et al. v. Thorpe Insulation Company, et al.[In The Matter of Thorpe Insulation Company] and National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford, et al. v. Thorpe Insulation Company, et al. [In the Matter of Thorpe Insulation Company], Nos. 10-56543 and 10-56622, 9th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1272).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. and plaintiffs’ counsel in four Canadian Vioxx class actions announced Jan. 19 that they have agreed to settle the litigation for up to $ 36.3 million (Mignacca, et al. v. Merck Frosst Canada Ltd, et al., No. 04-CV-045435CP, Ontario Super. Ct. of Justice; Pelletier v. Merck & Co. Inc., et al., No. 500-06-000437-083, and Sigouin, et al. v. Merck & Co. Inc., et al., No. 500-06-000246-047, Quebec Superior Court, Montreal Dist.; Bray, et al. v. Merck Frosst Canada Ltd, et al., Q.B. No. 1727 of 2004, Court of Queen’s Bench of Saskatchewan).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

AUSTIN, Texas – Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Janssen LLP said Jan. 19 that it has agreed to pay $ 158 million to settle claims by Texas that it defrauded the Medicaid program through its off-label promotion of the atypical antipsychotic drug Risperdal (State of Texas, ex rel. Allen Jones v. Janssen LP, No. D-1GV-04-001288, Texas Dist., Travis Co.).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

BROOKLYN, NY – The Zyprexa multidistrict litigation judge on Jan. 12 approved a $ 4.5 million settlement between Eli Lilly and Co. and six third-party payers who had their Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act class action vacated and who couldn’t find any other health benefit providers to join their individual suits, the parties told Mealey Publications (In Re: Zyprexa Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 1596, No. 04-md-1596, UFCW Local 1776 v. Eli Lilly and Company, Nos. 05-5115, E.D. N.Y.).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

SAN FRANCISCO – A manufacturer may not be held strictly liable or negligent for harm caused by another manufacturer’s asbestos-containing product except where the defendant bears some direct responsibility for the resulting harm, the California Supreme Court held today in rejecting “an unprecedented expansion of strict products liability” (Barbara J. O’Neil, et al. v. Crane Co., et al., No. S177401, Calif. Sup.).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Because the Credit Repair Organizations Act (CROA) does not specifically state whether claims brought pursuant to the act are eligible for arbitration, the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires an arbitration agreement in a credit card agreement “to be enforced according to its terms,” a split U.S. Supreme Court ruled Jan. 10 (CompuCredit Corp., et al. v. Wanda Greenwood, et al., No. 10-948, U.S. Sup.).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

PHILADELPHIA – A Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Jan. 4 ordered a new trial in an employment discrimination case against United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS) after finding that a federal judge in New Jersey abused his discretion when dismissing the woman’s action as a sanction for her failure to produce original copies of two doctors’ notes until after a mistrial was declared (Laureen Bull v. United Parcel Service Inc., No. 10-4339, 3rd Cir.).
LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News