Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Judge orders Florida State, ACC into mediation

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A Tallahassee judge has ordered Florida State and the Atlantic Coast Conference to enter mediation in hopes of settling a high-profile lawsuit that could dramatically impact the future of the league. Judge John C. Cooper technically approved the ACC's motion to dismiss Monday but gave FSU seven days to amend its complaint because the university needs more specificity regarding key facts in a case he said "is worth up to half a billion dollars." The conference would have 20 days to respond afterward, and another hearing would be set. "The case is not over," Cooper said. "The case will continue." Cooper ordered the sides to begin mediation within 120 days. But a mediator cannot force an agreement, so the case could end up back in court. "I send every case to mediation except mortgage foreclosures," Cooper said. "This is not being done any differently." The Seminoles are pushing to exit the ACC and explore a more lucrative landing spot, potentially the Big Ten Conference. The hearing Monday was the latest in dueling lawsuits lodged in December. They include back-and-forth arguments pertaining to jurisdiction, a highly guarded grant-of-rights agreement between member schools and the league, and a confidential TV deal between the ACC and ESPN. The ACC wants the case heard in Charlotte, where the league is headquartered, and doesn't want the broadcasting contract made public. Florida State wants to move the venue to Tallahassee and prefers the documents be unsealed for financial transparency. FSU had been signaling discontent for a year about the ACC falling further behind the Big Ten and the Southeastern Conference in payouts even while raking in record revenues. The ACC's revenue increased to nearly $617 million during the 2021-22 season, with an average distribution of nearly $39.5 million per school for full members. Still, that leaves ACC schools receiving about $10 million a year less than SEC schools even though ESPN is partnered with both leagues in broadcast deals. Clemson, another ACC school, has joined FSU in challenging the ACC's right to charge hundreds of millions of dollars to leave the conference. Clemson's complaint filed in South Carolina said the ACC's "exorbitant $140 million" exit penalty and the grant of rights used to bind schools to a conference through their media rights should be struck down. Neither Clemson nor Florida State has filed formal notice to withdraw from the ACC.

Jury: BNSF contributed to 2 deaths by asbestos exposure

HELENA, Mont. — A federal jury on Monday said BNSF Railway contributed to the deaths of two people who were exposed to asbestos decades ago when tainted mining material was shipped through a Montana town where thousands have been sickened. The jury awarded $4 million each in compensatory damages to the estates of the two plaintiffs, who died in 2020. Jurors said asbestos that spilled in the railyard in Libby, Montana, was a substantial factor in the plaintiffs' illnesses and death. The jury did not find that BNSF acted intentionally or with indifference so there will be no punitive damages awarded. Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. acquired BNSF in 2010, two decades after the vermiculite mine in Libby shut down and stopped shipping its contaminated product by rail. The pollution in Libby has been cleaned up, largely at public expense. Yet the long timeframe over which asbestos-related diseases develop means people previously exposed are likely to continue getting sick for years to come, health officials say. Attorneys for the estates of the two victims — Joyce Walder and Thomas Wells — had argued that the railroad knew the asbestos-tainted vermiculite was dangerous but failed to act. Her sister said after the jury returned its verdict that no amount of money could replace Walder. "I'd rather have her than all the money in the world," Hemphill said. BNSF said its employees didn't know the vermiculite was filled with hazardous microscopic asbestos fibers. The case in federal civil court over the two deaths was the first of numerous lawsuits against the Texas-based railroad corporation to reach trial over its past operations in Libby. Current and former residents of the small town near the U.S.-Canada border want BNSF held accountable, accusing it of playing a role in asbestos exposure that health officials say has killed several hundred people and sickened thousands. The railroad said it was obliged under law to ship the vermiculite, which was used in insulation and for other commercial purposes, and that W.R. Grace employees had concealed the health hazards from the railroad. BNSF attorney Chad Knight said the railroad could only be held liable if it could have foreseen the health hazards of asbestos based on information available decades ago when the alleged exposures happened. "In the 50s, 60s and 70s no one in the public suspected there might be health concerns," Knight said Friday. The plaintiffs argued that BNSF higher-ups knew for decades that the vermiculite contained asbestos and that concerns about workers breathing asbestos dust had existed in medical journals since the late 1890s. The judge instructed the jury it could only find the railroad negligent based on its actions in the Libby Railyard, not for hauling the vermiculite. BNSF was formed in 1995 from the merger of Burlington Northern railroad, which operated in Libby for decades, and the Santa Fe Pacific Corp. Berkshire Hathaway, based in Nebraska and chaired by Buffett, acquired BNSF in 2010. Looming over the proceedings was W.R. Grace, which operated a mountaintop vermiculite mine 7 miles outside of Libby until it closed in 1990. The Maryland-based company played a central role in Libby's tragedy and has paid significant settlements to victims. U.S. District Court Judge Brian Morris referred to the the chemical company as "the elephant in the room" during the BNSF trial and reminded jurors repeatedly that the case was about the railroad's conduct, not W.R. Grace's separate liability. Federal prosecutors in 2005 indicted W. R. Grace and executives from the company on criminal charges over the contamination in Libby. A jury acquitted them following a 2009 trial. The Environmental Protection Agency descended on Libby after 1999 news reports of illnesses and deaths among mine workers and their families. In 2009 the agency declared in Libby the nation's first ever public health emergency under the federal Superfund cleanup program. The seven-member federal jury had been instructed to decide if the railroad was at fault in the deaths and if so, the amount of damages to award to their estates. A separate proceeding would be needed to determine the amount of any punitive damages. A second trial against the railroad over the death of a Libby resident is scheduled for May in federal court in Missoula.

$34.6 million verdict: Patent infringement case protects, rewards SC company

Action: Infringement Injuries alleged: Patent infringement with trade dress allegations Case name: GeigTech East Bay LLC v. Lutron Electronics Inc. Court/case no.: U.S. Southern District of New York / 18 civ 5290 Judge: Colleen McMahon Amount: $34.6 million Date: March 15, 2024 Most helpful expert: Douglas Kim, patent attorney, of Kim, Lahey & Killough, Greenville Attorneys: Gary Sorden of Cole Schotz, Dallas (for the plaintiff); Scott W. Breedlove of Carter Arnett, Dallas (for the defendant) GeigTech East Bay, a South Carolina company that makes modern window shades, obtained U.S. Patent No. 10,294,717, for a "shade bracket with concealed wiring" on May 21, 2019. The patent was originally filed by Richard J. McKenna of Foley & Lardner, Milwaukee, and obtained by Douglas Kim, a registered patent attorney, of Kim, Lahey & Killough, Greenville. GeigTech filed a federal patent infringement complaint with trade dress allegations against Lutron Electronics Co. Inc. One of the tactics Lutron used to try to invalidate the patent. However, the patent written by Kim withstood two challenges in the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board and a jury trial. On March 12, the jury returned a verdict stating that Lutron had infringed on GeigTech’s patent and awarded $34.6 in damages. According to the jury verdict form, “Lutron opted to poach (GeigTech’s) patented designs and intellectual property to try and remain competitive in a segment of the market that (GeigTech) cornered.” As the finding of infringement was willful, GeigTech can ask the judge to triple the damages.

Defense verdict: Jury turns back lawsuit from pandemic-inspired claim

Action: Breach of contract and violation of South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act Injuries alleged: Breach of contract, unfair trade practice act, breach of warranty Case name: HHBC Inc. v. Jamis Bicycles Court/case no.: Beaufort County Common Pleas / 2021-CP-07-00143 Judge: Bobby Bonds Injuries alleged: $1.03 million (subject to tripling and addition of attorney’s fees to an estimated $4.5 million) Date: March 19, 2024 Most helpful expert: George Durant, CPA, Columbia Attorneys: Ashley Twombley and Thomas Iandoli of Twenge + Twombley, Beaufort (for the defendant); John Bowen of Laughlin & Bowen, Hilton Head (for the plaintiff) In 2021, plaintiff Hilton Head Bicycle Co. sued Jamis Bicycle Corp., alleging defendant breached a bicycle supply contract and caused plaintiff more than $1 million in damages. Plaintiff further alleged that the manner in which defendant breached the contract violated the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act, allowing plaintiff to seek treble damages and attorney’s fees. The total exposure was estimated to be $4.5 million. A central issue at trial involved the unforeseen effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the supply chain, and whether these effects excused defendant from the alleged breach. This is one of the few known jury verdicts dealing with the unforeseen effects of COVID-19 and the South Carolina Uniform Commercial Code’s “commercial impracticably” provisions. Another central issue involved plaintiff's alleged damages, which were ultimately limited by the trial court judge before being presented to the jury. When plaintiff’s damages were presented to the jury, defendant alleged plaintiff’s damages claims were not supported by sufficient documentation (a calculation methodology, receipts, invoices, etc.) and amounted to little more than a homemade list of numbers set forth on a single sheet of paper. In closing arguments, plaintiff’s counsel Ashley Twombley argued, “My children have prepared Christmas list with more detail than this wish list prepared by .” After a six-day trial, the jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of defendant, concluding it did not breach the contract, and that plaintiff was not entitled to any damages.