Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Verdicts
Whistleblowers
A Madera County, CA, jury awarded $25 million to two employees who claimed they suffered retribution after blowing the whistle on their employer's insurance fraud. Valladares v. Madera Quality Nut Inc., Superior Court of Madera County, Madera, CA , 09-26-2006
Shortly after a fire at the Madera Quality Nut Co. in 2003, plaintiff Ramon Delgadillo, a forklift operator in the quality control department, was instructed to place pallets of unusable nuts in with the pallets of fire-damaged nuts. He complied, but then he and two others complained to management, the insurance company and the state department of insurance that the company over-reported product damage. Subsequently, each of them was either demoted, suspended or fired. They sued Madera and its parent company claiming that they were wrongfully terminated or demoted in retaliation. The jury awarded $25,208,100 in compensatory and punitive damages to two of the three employees. The $25 million in punitive damages was later reduced to $1.25 million.
Whistleblowers
A Madera County, CA, jury awarded $25 million to two employees who claimed they suffered retribution after blowing the whistle on their employer's insurance fraud. Valladares v. Madera Quality Nut Inc., Superior Court of Madera County, Madera, CA , 09-26-2006
Shortly after a fire at the Madera Quality Nut Co. in 2003, plaintiff Ramon Delgadillo, a forklift operator in the quality control department, was instructed to place pallets of unusable nuts in with the pallets of fire-damaged nuts. He complied, but then he and two others complained to management, the insurance company and the state department of insurance that the company over-reported product damage. Subsequently, each of them was either demoted, suspended or fired. They sued Madera and its parent company claiming that they were wrongfully terminated or demoted in retaliation. The jury awarded $25,208,100 in compensatory and punitive damages to two of the three employees. The $25 million in punitive damages was later reduced to $1.25 million.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.