The case involved a dispute over whether Plaintiff PIC Group could recover various categories of attorney’s fees from Defendant LandCoast Insulation under an indemnity clause in their Subcontractor Agreement, which arose after a scaffolding collapse. The court denied Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment, holding that the indemnity provision was clear and unambiguous under Georgia law and broad enough to cover fees incurred in enforcing the agreement itself. It also found that fees for independent counsel retained by the insured under a reservation of rights could be recoverable and that challenges to the reasonableness of the fees were premature because discovery was incomplete.
The case involved a business dispute between Jimmy Harrell, his companies Different Drummer Ultramedia, LLC and My South Foods, LLC, and Robert St. John over joint ventures to produce and market a cooking television pilot show and related food products using St. John's recipes and brand. Harrell alleged ownership and copyright infringement claims concerning websites, catalogs, books, and the pilots after the ventures failed and the parties disagreed on progress and dissolution. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint with prejudice. It reasoned that the plaintiffs were not the real parties in interest for some claims, conceded others, and provided no evidence of infringement or improper actions by St. John, who was properly marketing the pilots on behalf of the LLC.
This case involved a lawsuit by plaintiff Ochello against Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company seeking uninsured and underinsured motorist benefits under an auto policy for injuries from two accidents in 2005 and 2006, along with claims for breach of contract and bad faith. Liberty moved for summary judgment, arguing the claims were time-barred. The court granted the motions and dismissed the complaint with prejudice, holding that the statute of limitations for uninsured claims began when Ochello knew or should have known the other drivers were uninsured or underinsured, which occurred shortly after each accident, and that later payments by the insurer did not toll or reopen the limitations period.
The case involved the Estate of Mississippi attorney J.C. Ainsworth suing Louisiana attorneys Gary Boutwell and his firm for one-third of contingency fees from a 2010 settlement in a Louisiana motor vehicle accident case, based on a 2005 fee-splitting agreement initiated by Ainsworth to handle claims he could not litigate himself. The defendants moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court granted the motion and dismissed the case without prejudice, holding that the defendants lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Mississippi to satisfy due process. The core reasoning was that the defendants had not purposefully directed their activities at Mississippi residents, the underlying legal work occurred entirely in Louisiana, Ainsworth initiated the relationship, and the communications at issue did not constitute the alleged breach or performance of the contract.
This product liability case arose from a 2007 accident in which plaintiff James Elliot, a farm worker, was seriously injured while repairing an Amadas 9900 peanut combine when the separator mechanism was activated, resulting in the amputation of both legs below the knees and vision loss. Plaintiffs sued the manufacturers under the Mississippi Products Liability Act, alleging strict liability, negligence, breach of warranties, and defects in design and warnings. The court granted the defendants' motions to exclude the testimony of plaintiffs' expert Jack Sparks on grounds of untimely disclosure and lack of reliability under Daubert standards, as the expert had not inspected the machine and his opinions on design alternatives and warnings were deemed unsupported. Without that expert evidence, the court found no genuine issue of material fact on essential elements such as causation or feasible design alternatives, granted summary judgment to the defendants, and declared the remaining motions moot.
In PIC Group, Inc. v. LandCoast Insulation, Inc., the court considered a motion for partial summary judgment by subcontractor LandCoast Insulation seeking a declaratory judgment that an indemnification clause in its contract with PIC was void and unenforceable under Georgia law because it shifted liability for personal injury claims. The court denied the motion, holding that the indemnification provisions were enforceable. The core reasoning was that Georgia precedent permits enforcement of such clauses when paired with insurance requirements that shift the risk of loss to the insurer regardless of fault; here, the contract mandated comprehensive general liability insurance covering contractual liability assumed under the agreement, along with workers' compensation coverage, which together satisfied the statutory exception in O.C.G.A. § 13-8-2(b).
.jpg?width=900)