Attorney Molly Barker Gilligan's Legal Cases

Appeals

Ferguson v. Morton, 2013 PA Super 329, 2013 Pa. Super. LEXIS 4574 (2012)

N/A

OUTCOME: Co-Counsel for Appellant

Author of the Brief for Appellant. The Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the trial court’s order granting a new trial based upon the inflammatory closing argument by plaintiff’s counsel. In particul ... ar, the Court held that trial court erred in presuming that the jury’s verdict improperly included punitive damages. Thus, the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that the summation so prejudiced the jury as to require a new trial.

Appeals

Barnes v. Keller, 2012 PA Super 179, 2012 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3495 (Pa.Super. 2012)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Prepared Brief for the Appellant. The Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in this uninsured motorist claim. In particular, the Court held that a jetter atta ... ched to a cargo van could be a “motor vehicle” under the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law, and that genuine issues of fact existed that precluded the entry of summary judgment. The Court also disapproved of the fact that the trial judge failed to disclose that his spouse was employed as an attorney by the law firm representing the appellee.

Appeals

Lewis v. CRC Industries, Inc., 2010 PA Super 179, 7 A.3d 841 (Pa.Super. 2010)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Prepared the Brief for the Appellant. The Pennsylvania Superior Court ordered a new trial in a products liability action involving the application of New Jersey substantive law, holding that the law pr ... ohibits a court from introducing to the jury the principle of assumption of risk as a defense to a plaintiff's strict product liability claim stemming from an used in a workplace setting. The Court further held when a jury charge as a whole is inadequate, or not clear, or has a tendency to mislead or confuse, rather than clarify a material issue, that error is a sufficient basis for the award of a new trial.

Appeals

Commonwealth v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Harvey), 993 A.2d 270 (Pa. 2010)

N/A

OUTCOME:

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed that the use of actuarial data to calculate pension offsets for injured employees who also receive pension benefits from a defined benefit plan. By not foreclosi ... ng a claimant’s ability to challenge the calculations and the assumptions underlying them, injured workers may still employ actuaries to establish when improper and inaccurate calculations form the basis for a claimed offset.

Workers compensation

Philadelphia Gas Works v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Amodei), 964 A.2d 963 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2009)

N/A

OUTCOME: Reversed prior case law

This en banc decision holds that when an employer seeks an offset from workers' compensation benefits for pension benefits paid to an injured employee, the offset must be calculated based upon the net ... amount of the benefits received by the worker.

Molly Barker Gilligan's Legal Cases (5)

Ferguson v. Morton, 2013 PA Super 329, 2013 Pa. Super. LEXIS 4574 (2012)

Barnes v. Keller, 2012 PA Super 179, 2012 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3495 (Pa.Super. 2012)

Lewis v. CRC Industries, Inc., 2010 PA Super 179, 7 A.3d 841 (Pa.Super. 2010)

Commonwealth v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Harvey), 993 A.2d 270 (Pa. 2010)

Philadelphia Gas Works v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Amodei), 964 A.2d 963 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2009)