2 total
The court dismissed an application for partition and sale, finding it would cause the respondent oppressive hardship.
The applicant sought an urgent order for the partition and sale of a property held as tenants in common with the respondent, citing terminal illness.
The respondent opposed the sale, arguing it would cause him severe personal, emotional, and financial hardship amounting to oppression, and would prejudice his ongoing family law claims for resulting or constructive trust over the property.
The court dismissed the applicant's request for partition and sale, finding that the respondent had demonstrated sufficient hardship and that his trust claims were not frivolous and required a full trial.
The court also declined to grant declaratory relief regarding a second property, deeming the issue hypothetical and subject to alternative dispute resolution or the family law proceeding.
Class action for contaminated valsartan dismissed as law does not compensate for mere increased risk of harm.
The plaintiffs sought to certify a class action against the defendant pharmaceutical companies for manufacturing and distributing valsartan contaminated with NDMA and NDEA, which are probable human carcinogens.
The plaintiffs claimed damages for psychological harm and pure economic losses (medical bills, medical monitoring, refunds, and wasted pills) arising from the increased risk of being diagnosed with cancer, but explicitly did not claim damages for actually developing cancer.
The court dismissed the certification motion, finding that the law does not recognize a cause of action for the mere creation of risk or for pure economic loss from shoddy but not imminently dangerous goods, and therefore the claims failed to satisfy the cause of action, common issues, and preferable procedure criteria.