Jump To Navigation
Media

Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz in the News

Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz Cases

Prescription Drug Liability

Personal Injury

Amanda Jax Case

Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz in the News

Article By Our Attorney Barbara Nilva Nevin Regarding the BAPCPA Act of 2005.

National Law Journal Article "Small Firm Takes Big Bankruptcy Fight to High Court."

Robert J. Milavetz, Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. public service for over 45 years. Read the article.

2 Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. attorneys appear in Minnesota Lawyer for groundbreaking 1st Amendment challenge to the Bankruptcy Act of 2005 (BAPCPA).
Click
here to read the article.

Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. United States makes cover story of Minnesota Bench & Bar April 2008. Click here to read the article.

Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. is proud to announce the expansion of the firm's practice areas to include pharmaceutical liability claims

New York Times Article June 2009 on Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. United States

New York Times Article "Insured, but Bankrupt in Medical Crisis"

National Law Journal on BAPCPA challenge.

Law & Politics, Lawsuits of the Year ("Gagged and Bound" and "Last Call for Sidelines"):

Minnesota Bar Association Lecture on BAPCPA of 2005 and the decisions in Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A.

American Bar Association Journal articles regarding Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, et. al. v. United States. 1 2 3

National Law Journal article regarding Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, et.al v. United States

Reuters articles on BAPCPA challenge. 1 2

Consumer Affairs article on Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz et.al. v. United States.

Wall Street Journal article on Milavetz v. U.S.

Finance and Commerce on Milavetz v. U.S.

Lawreader regarding Milavetz v. U.S.

ABA Journal, A Debt Defying Act:

Minnesota Lawyer interview with Chad Wm. Schulze regarding bicycle safety.

Back to the top

Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz Cases

Bankruptcy

Redlined Version of the Bankruptcy Code and of Titles 28 and 18.

BAPCPA Milavetz Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. United States Press Release

Eighth Circuit Opinion in Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. United States.

Milavetz Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. United States District Court Order

U.S Supreme Court to hear the case of Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. U.S. challenging the Bankruptcy Act of 2005 BAPCPA.

Read Milavetz Brief by clicking here.

Read American Bar Association ABA amicus brief here.

Read AARP, Brennan Justice Center, NACBA amici brief here.

Food Poisoning

Malt O Meal Recall salmonella contaminated foods from Cub Foods,Diamond Crystal, Fastco, Flavorite, Foodland, Good 'n Hearty, Hearty Traditions, Hy-Top, IGA, Mom's Best Natural, Megaroons,Millville, Our Family, Richfood, Shop 'n Save and Smart Menu. Click here for more information.

Back to the top

Prescription Drug Liability

Yasmin / Yaz MDL Sent to Southern District of Illinois

Yaz / Yasmin Class Action vs. MDL Consolidation

Yaz - Yasmin - Ocella Side Effects Lawsuit

Drugs Recalled for Dangerous Side-Effects

Back to the top

Personal Injury

Awareness of Traumatic Brain Injuries

Back to the top

Amanda Jax Case

For access to the Amanda Jax, et.al. v. Sidelines Bar & Grill, et. al. Summons & Complaint, click here

Nancy Grace, CNN, coverage of Amanda Jax

December 28, 2007 WCCO coverage of Amanda Jax Case

February 28, 2008 WCCO coverage of Amanda Jax Case

Mankato Free Press Article Amanda Jax

Star Tribune Article Amanda Jax

KARE11 coverage of Amanda Jax

Minnesota State University on Amanda Jax

Join Together article Amanda Jax

Lacrosse Tribune Coverage of Amanda Jax

Back to the top

News

Product Liability

[07/29] Govt to crash test 55 vehicles under new system
[07/29] Toyota recalls 412,000 cars in US, mostly Avalons
[07/26] Nap Nanny recliners recalled
[07/26] Medical device problems hurt 70,000+ kids annually
[07/22] 1.3 million Smith and Noble blinds recalled

More...

Personal Injury

[07/30] Mont. officials await test results in bear attack
[07/30] Inmate sues man he's convicted of burglarizing
[07/30] 1,200 homes evacuated in LA Co. as fire spreads
[07/29] Bear attack in Montana leaves 1 dead, 2 injured
[07/29] APNewsBreak: Pa. diocese sued in accuser's suicide

More...

Employment Practices

[07/29] Initial jobless claims drop to 457,000
[07/22] Elevated jobless claims point to weak labor market
[07/22] Additional jobless benefits hinge on House vote
[07/19] Obama to GOP: Restore jobless benefits

More...

Case Summaries

Workers' Comp

[06/24] Bifulco v. Patient Bus. & Fin. Serv., Inc.
In plaintiff's wrongful termination suit against her former employer, Fifth District's reversal of trial court's grant of defendant's motion for summary judgment is affirmed as workers' compensation retaliation claims brought against the state under section 440.205 are not subject to the presuit notice requirements of section 768.28(6)

[06/22] Hawaii Stevedores, Inc. v. Ogawa
In a petition for review of a decision of the Benefits Review Board (BRB) affirming an Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) grant of disability benefits under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, the petition is granted in part where: 1) the mere fact that an expert witness talked with a party's lawyer and then altered his or her opinion language, though it might be considered relevant, did not require a factfinder to find that expert witness was other than credible; and 2) the ALJ's finding of the maximum medical improvement date was not supported by substantial evidence. However, the petition is denied in part where: 1) the ALJ's finding that petitioner did not meet its burden of demonstrating prejudice was supported by substantial evidence, and respondent's late notice was properly excused; and 2) respondent's stroke qualified as a compensable injury under the Longshore Act.

[06/11] Zenith Ins. Co. v. Ayala
In a worker's compensation suit, the court of appeals' affirmance of trial court's holding that the insurer waived its right to contest compensability by not timely disputing the claimant's lumbar condition diagnosis is reversed and remanded as the sixty-day period for challenging compensability does not apply to a dispute over extent of injury.

[06/04] Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. v. VP Bldg., Inc.
In Chapter 11 proceedings, district court's affirmance of the bankruptcy court's decision disallowing an insurer's petition for administrative expenses, on the ground that the claim was not "actual" and did not benefit the estate, is affirmed as pursuant to In re HNRC Dissolution Co., 371 B.R. 210, (E.D. Ky. 2007), the insurer's request for reimbursement is not an "actual" expense within the meaning of the bankruptcy code.

[05/07] In re Odyssey Healthcare, Inc.
In plaintiff's negligence case against her employer, defendant's petition for writ of mandamus is conditionally granted as, the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to grant the defendant's motion to compel arbitration as the plaintiff failed to prove a valid defense against enforcement of her agreement to arbitrate disputes with her employer.

More...

Injury & Tort Law

[06/25] Crescent Towing & Salvage Co. v. Chios Beauty MV
In an action for damages sustained when defendant's ship collided with plaintiffs' barges and tugboats during Hurricane Katrina, partial judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where the district court did not clearly err in its finding of a predicted "direct hit" on New Orleans by the hurricane, its factual findings based on this finding, and the ultimate finding of negligence to the extent that it relied upon this finding. However, the matter is remanded where the district court needed to enter an order setting the total amount of recovery plaintiffs could recover in rem.

[06/25] Bagby Elevator Co. v. Schindler Elevator Corp.
In an action for tortious interference with contract, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) under the court's highly deferential standard of review, there was no reversible error in the district court's decision to use the pattern jury instruction; 2) there was sufficient evidence of both malice and gross negligence to support an award of exemplary damages; and 3) there was ample evidence of causation to support the verdict.

[06/25] Lal v. State of Cal.
In an action against the California Highway Patrol and certain officers for the shooting death of plaintiff's husband, dismissal of the action with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute when her attorney failed to meet deadlines and attend hearings is reversed where an attorney's gross negligence constituted an extraordinary circumstance warranting relief from a judgment dismissing the case for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b).

[06/24] DDJ Mgmt., LLC v. Rhone Group L.L.C.
In an action claiming that defendants presented plaintiffs with corporate financial statements that were false and misleading, the appellate division's modification of the trial court's order dismissing plaintiffs' fraud claim is reversed where: 1) when a plaintiff has taken reasonable steps to protect itself against deception, it should not be denied recovery merely because hindsight suggested that it might have been possible to detect the fraud when it occurred; and 2) plaintiffs in this action for fraud have alleged facts from which a jury could find that they were justified in relying on the representations defendants made to them.

[06/18] Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Merrell
In plaintiffs' wrongful death and survival claims against Wal-Mart for the death of their son from smoke inhalation, claiming that a halogen lamp purchased from Wal-Mart caused the fire, the court of appeals' reversal of the trial court's grant of defendant's motion for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiffs produced evidence on each challenged element of their cause of action is reversed as, plaintiff's expert's testimony was legally insufficient to support causation.

More...

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.

Do you have legal needs? We can help! Fill out this form or call us (866) 531-2705

NOTE: Labels in bold are required.

Contact Information
  1. disclaimer.
Additional Information

Visit our information centers to learn more about the following topics:

  • Motor Vehicle Accidents
  • Employment Law
  • Bankruptcy
Office Locations

Edina Office
6500 France Avenue South
Edina, Minnesota 55435

Local: (952) 236-4298
Toll Free: (866) 531-2705
Fax: (952) 920-6869

Email Us | Map & Directions

More Convenient Locations »