Employers involved in litigation under Title VII and related federal civil rights laws understand that a prevailing plaintiff is entitled to collect his or her attorneys’ fees. These employers may not be aware that in more...more
SC18996 - Meyers v. Livingston, Adler, Pulda, Meiklejohn & Kelly, P.C.
This case arrived from a divided Appellate Court where some jurist opined that the plaintiff’s attorney malpractice claims sounded solely in tort,...more
If the mainstream media is to be believed, the patent system is now “broken.” This notion is frequently blamed on the perceived increase in so-called patent assertion entities (“PAEs”), referred to derogatorily in the press...more
In a landmark case from 2012, the Florida Supreme Court held that when suing insurers for bad faith, a policyholder must first sue the insurance company for violating the terms of the insurance agreement, and only after...more
A well-known “patent assertion entity” (PAE), MPHJ Technology Investment LLC, filed a declaratory judgment suit against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and its Commissioners for the agency’s alleged “threats to bring...more
Over the past year, both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government have expressed increasing support for legislation and other measures targeting patent litigation abuse by non-practicing entities...more
The related torts of malicious prosecution and abuse of process both vindicate the important personal rights to be free from unwarranted or abusive litigation tactics. There are some important distinctions in the elements of...more
Patent reform legislation continues to be hotly debated, both in the public arena and before Congress. Federal Circuit Chief Judge Randall R. Rader recently said that Congress should leave reform to the courts, echoing...more
Malicious prosecution actions in California are complex. Filing and defending such actions require the handling attorney to have a deep understanding of the interplay of anti-SLAPP law, SLAPP-back actions and malicious...more
To a full house and rapt audience of 500 attendees at the Eastern District of Texas Bench Bar Conference in Plano, Federal Circuit Chief Judge Randall R. Rader last week delivered a persuasive and impassioned Patent Law...more
Litigants that have been forced to defend groundless litigation are entitled to recover their attorneys' fees even if those costs were paid by an insurance company, Maryland's highest court has ruled.
Just in time for Halloween, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has introduced yet another piece of legislation to combat the perceived "patent troll" problem. The Patent Litigation Integrity Act (S. 1612) is aimed at shifting the...more
Following two earlier drafts floated in May and September 2013, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte on October 23, 2013 formally introduced a bill, titled the “Innovation Act,” aimed at curbing abusive patent...more
In Surface Supplied, Inc. v. Kirby Morgan Dive Systems, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143478 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2013) (Chesney, J.), the Court dismissed attempted monopolization and monopolization counterclaims with leave to...more
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced on September 27, 2013 that it would begin an investigation of so-called “patent assertion entities” (PAE). Its first step was to seek public comment on a lengthy series of...more
Traditionally, Texas trial court judges have enjoyed a virtually unlimited power to order new trials “in the interest of justice.” The Texas appellate courts have refused to review almost all new trial orders. This has led to...more
Previously, we posted about Governor Peter Shumlin signing into law Vermont’s first-in-the-nation (and so far only-in-the-nation) patent troll legislation helping Vermont businesses protect themselves from bad faith patent...more
In order to combat the perceived "patent troll" problem, members of Congress in both the House and the Senate introduced bills last spring aimed at addressing abusive patent litigation tactics. One of the more comprehensive...more
Christ v. Flinthill Space Comm. Trust, 2013 WL 3771178 (Va. June 17, 2013).
In this divorce case, the plaintiff and her counsel were fined $880,748.26 for using abusive, “vindictive” discovery tactics. ...more
In Trapp v. Naiman, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District decided an interesting real property case. The case began as a non-judicial foreclosure and unlawful detainer matter. The case then morphed...more
House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) on May 23, 2013 released a discussion draft of legislation designed to curb abusive patent litigation....more
This post is an updated version of the original, which was published in July of 2011.
How could INTERPOL shield itself from being used as a political weapon against a corrupt country's own people? In a previous post,...more
I. FLORIDA STATE CASES – STEFANIE LINCOLN -
Litigation Privilege: litigation privilege, which protects actions taken in the course of and related to judicial proceedings from civil liability, applies to causes of...more
On May 9, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Behn v. Moulton Contracting Ltd., 2013 SCC 26, affirming that Aboriginal groups seeking to challenge the validity of permits or authorizations granted to...more
In a prior post, we explained how a general liability policy may cover antitrust, patent, trade secret and other business litigation claims, if there are allegations that insured made negative comments about the other party’s...more
Back to Top