This case involved a claim by Marco Realini against Contship Containerlines for damage to his yacht during ocean shipment from Italy to Miami under theories of negligence, breach of bailment, and breach of contract of carriage. The action was removed to federal court because the claims arose under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA) or the Harter Act as incorporated into the bill of lading. The magistrate judge recommended granting the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment on damages, limiting the carrier's liability to $500. The core reasoning was that COGSA applied by virtue of the bill of lading's paramount clause even though the yacht was carried on deck, the shipper had not declared a higher value, and the yacht qualified as a single package subject to COGSA's per-package limitation.
The case involved Miami-Dade County police sergeant Phillip Gaylord suing the County under the Fair Labor Standards Act for unpaid overtime compensation, claiming he worked an average of 127 hours per week (87 overtime) while supervising the Transit Squad from 1993 to 1995 but was only paid for about 1,800 hours despite alleging 4,000 more. After a bench trial, the court entered judgment for the County, finding no FLSA violation. The court reasoned that Gaylord failed to record or report the disputed hours in his daily activity reports, payroll records, or overtime slips, that his supervisors lacked knowledge of the extra work (including time spent monitoring a radio at home, which is not compensable), and that budget surpluses existed yet he neither requested compensatory time nor followed procedures, so he did not prove the hours worked or the employer's awareness by a preponderance of the evidence.
In this case, plaintiff Linda Palmer-Scopetta, a former account representative for defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, sued MetLife alleging gender discrimination and sexual harassment under Title VII, the Florida Civil Rights Act, and local law, along with related retaliation and emotional distress claims. MetLife moved to compel arbitration and stay the federal action, citing the plaintiff's execution of a NASD Form U-4 registration that incorporated the NASD Code of Arbitration Procedure requiring arbitration of employment disputes. The plaintiff opposed arbitration on grounds including a pending NASD rule change exempting discrimination claims, the effect of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, and other limitations, but the court rejected these arguments. The court granted the motion to compel arbitration and stayed the action, holding that the arbitration agreement applied to the claims, the new NASD rule was effective only for claims filed on or after January 1, 1999, and binding precedent permitted enforcement of such agreements for Title VII claims.
This case is a copyright infringement action brought by CBS Broadcasting and other network television owners against PrimeTime 24 Joint Venture, alleging that PrimeTime's satellite retransmissions of copyrighted network programs violated the plaintiffs' exclusive rights under the Copyright Act. The court found that PrimeTime's retransmissions were not permitted by the limited statutory license in the Satellite Home Viewers Act, which allows service only to "unserved households" that cannot receive an over-the-air signal of grade B intensity from a local network affiliate. The principal dispute concerned the proper interpretation and application of the "grade B intensity" standard, with the court relying on signal intensity testing, Longley-Rice propagation maps, geocoding, and cable subscription checks to determine eligibility. Based on these findings, the court concluded that injunctive relief was required to terminate service to ineligible households and enforce compliance with the statutory limits.
This case involved CBS, Fox, and affiliated stations suing satellite provider PrimeTime 24 for copyright infringement, alleging unauthorized retransmission of network programs like '60 Minutes' and 'The Simpsons' to subscribers nationwide in violation of the Satellite Home Viewers Act's limits to 'unserved households.' PrimeTime moved for summary judgment, contending that the networks lacked standing under 17 U.S.C. § 501 because only local affiliates could assert infringement claims in their markets, and that Fox's license agreement further barred its claims. The court denied the motion, holding that the SHVA amendment to § 501(e) expressly treats network stations as legal or beneficial owners entitled to sue, that CBS and Fox held exclusive rights supporting standing, and that the affiliates association and Fox could also pursue claims within statutory limits.
This case involves plaintiff Gary J. Venette's (now Pamela Venette) claim for Social Security disability insurance benefits, alleging onset of disability in 1993 due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and associated symptoms like coughing and fatigue. The Social Security Administration denied the application, with an ALJ finding that the plaintiff retained the capacity for certain sedentary work and could perform past relevant work as a manufacturing supervisor; the Appeals Council affirmed this as the Commissioner's final decision. The district court granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, reversed the Commissioner's decision, and denied the defendant's cross-motion. The court determined that the ALJ had failed to apply the required Eleventh Circuit two-prong standard for assessing the claimant's pain testimony or provide reasons for rejecting it, and that the record evidence unequivocally supported disability, permitting reversal without remand under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).