Breaking Down Bad Faith: Insurers’ Good Faith Duties and Defending Bad Faith Claims
An Uncompromising Insurer: What is a Policyholder to Do?
Hinshaw Insurance Law TV: Recent Changes in Florida Property Insurance Law and How They Will Affect First Party Insurance
Podcast - The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Lord of The Rings Author’s Estate Clings to its Precious Trademark, Blocking JRR Token
The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Lord of The Rings Author’s Estate Clings to its Precious Trademark, Blocking JRR Token
Butler's Thursday Tips #7 | Civil Remedy Notices
Subro Sense Podcast - Considerations In Fixed Funds/Limited Pool Scenarios
Protecting Your Brand in China
After a “hotly contested” four-year litigation that resulted in mutual, without prejudice dismissals, the plaintiff in Vitaform, Inc. v. Aeroflow, Inc., 2023 NCBC 76, said it would refile and try again. But first, the...more
At a time when remote depositions are commonplace, litigators weigh any number of factors when deciding whether a deposition should be conducted in-person or remotely. Does the case turn on the credibility of the witness, and...more
The eighth edition of The E-Discovery Digest focuses on recent decisions addressing the scope and application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine, spoliation, and discovery responses....more
It is not every day the U.S. Supreme Court pays attention to matters that affect the practice of discovery, but that day came with Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. v. Haeger, 581 U.S. ___, 137 S.Ct 1178 (April 18, 2017). Writing...more
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified in Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger that even a district court’s exercise of broad discretion to impose a civil sanction for a litigant’s bad faith conduct has to be limited by a...more
Most practitioners are familiar with the federal sanction powers as codified in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (i.e., Rules 11, 26, 30 and 37). However, all federal courts also possess inherent sanction power that is...more
In recent years, discussions regarding the contours of a federal court’s inherent authority to sanction litigants for bad-faith behavior have been heating up faster than a defective tire at highway speeds. In the 2015...more
Coventry Health Care of Missouri, Inc. v. Nevils, No. 16-149: The Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) is authorized under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Act of 1959 (“FEHBA”), 5 U.S.C. §8901 et seq., to contract...more
In Fulton v. Livingston Financial LLC, 2016 WL 3976558 (W.D. Wash. July 25, 2016), U.S. District Judge James L. Robart sanctioned a defense lawyer who “inexcusabl[y]” relied on outdated case law and pre-2015 amendments to...more
REAL PROPERTY UPDATE - - Foreclosure/Discovery: trial court erred by declining to rule prior to trial on borrowers’ motion in limine seeking to exclude evidence contrary to bank’s “technical admissions” established by...more
Stragent, LLC v. Intel Corp. - Applying recent standards for determining whether a case is “exceptional” under Octane Fitness for purposes of awarding fees, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas...more
On April 15, 2013, the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, granted the insured’s request for the production of certain claims file material and previously sealed discovery in Estée Lauder Inc. v....more