What is at will employment law?
Patent Office Litigation Update: IPR Discovery and Evidentiary PTAB Decisions
[Legal Perspective] When Is It NOT Okay to Delete Your Social Media Account?
N.Y. Anti-Terror Law Diminishes Pursuit of Terrorism: Lawyer
Newtown Shootings Could Give Rise to More Litigation, Says Pinsky
Rajaratnam Judge: Wiretaps in Insider Trading Cases are "Radical"
So your client has been involved in motor vehicle collision. Now what? Whether representing a plaintiff or a defendant in a crash, preserving all potentially relevant evidence is an obvious first concern. What may not be so...more
When litigating cases in court, lawyers must follow formal rules of evidence. In 1965, Chief Justice Earl Warren of the United States Supreme Court started developing what would eventually become formal Rules of Evidence. The...more
An episode of This American Life described the failed effort to get a Tic-tac-toe-playing chicken into evidence in the death penalty case of a mentally ill man with a very low IQ. Defense counsel was trying to rebut a...more
Courts commonly observe that the purpose of Business Interruption or Business Income insurance is to put the policyholder in the same position it would have been in had there been no interruption. The Business Interruption...more
In Greater Portage Chamber of Commerce v. Porter County Assessor, Pet. No. 64-016-10-2-8-00001 (January 2, 2015), the Indiana Board of Tax Review confirmed the denial of a property tax exemption where the taxpayer failed to...more
On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court provided guidance on the standard of review for claim construction on appeal in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-854. The Court held “[w]hen reviewing a district...more
Clarifying what is impermissible “new” evidence for a Patent Owner Preliminary Response in an inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) ordered that the patent owner’s exhibit, in the form...more
The US Supreme Court recently reversed the conviction of a commercial fisherman, John L. Yates, accused of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1519, also known as the anti-shredding provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), holding that...more
In its recent ruling in Yates v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a conviction under Sarbanes-Oxley’s “anti-shredding” statute, holding that it covers documents, records and only “tangible objects” similar to...more
Action Item: The Supreme Court’s decision in Yates v. United States will significantly impact how in-house counsel, outside counsel, and compliance officers alike should advise their clients with respect to evidence...more
Section 1519 was passed as part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the wake of Enron’s massive accounting fraud. The section was designed to fill a gap in the law by preventing corporate document-shredding to conceal evidence of...more
When you’re in trial, your goal is to provide the jury with the information they need to make an informed decision and also to prove to them that your point of view is correct. What you don’t want is for the jury’s attention...more
The case, Yates v. United States, arose from a offshore inspection of a commercial fishing vessel in the Gulf of Mexico. During the inspection, a federal agent found that the ship’s catch contained undersized red grouper, in...more
Texas courts have long taken the position that “[w]hen covered and excluded perils combine to cause an injury, the insured must present some evidence affording the jury a reasonable basis on which to allocate damages.”...more
On December 3, 2014, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal overturned a police detective’s conviction for deleting a video from his work cellular telephone. The video recorded a witness making statements about a case, but...more
Advantor Systems Corp. v. DRS Technical Services, Inc., 2015 WL 403308 (M.D. Fl. Jan. 28, 2015).
In this non-disclosure case, the plaintiff sought sanctions after the defendant reformatted an employee laptop, allegedly...more
Gulf fisherman John Yates was cited by a federally-deputized Florida Fish & Wildlife officer for having caught a few red grouper that were about an inch under the 20” minimum limit at the time (they’d have been legal under...more
On February 25, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Yates v. United States.1 This case involved the interpretation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1519, a statute that was added as part of the...more
A recent case out of Montana, Peterson-Tuell v. First Student Transp., LLC, 339 P.3d 16 (Mont. Nov. 15, 2014), highlights the import of a Rule 403 challenge and of making your challenges and objections as comprehensive and...more
Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal recently filed an opinion that emphasizes the importance of properly authenticating evidence in support of a motion for summary judgment. In Colon v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al.,...more
On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Yates v. United States, No. 13-7451, holding that fish are not “tangible objects” within the meaning of 18 U. S. C. §1519, a federal law providing that a person who...more
We now know that Sarbanes-Oxley does not apply to fish . . .
While conducting an offshore inspection of a commercial fishing vessel in the Gulf of Mexico, a federal agent found that the ship’s catch contained...more
Last week, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) v. Freeman, No. 13-2365 (4th Cir. Feb. 20, 2105), the Fourth Circuit affirmed the award of summary judgment against the EEOC in its suit alleging that the...more
Last week, the North Carolina Court of Appeals addressed some unique issues with respect to the trial court record in an appeal of a quasi-judicial proceeding....more
What ethical obligations does a Florida attorney have when advising a client to remove material from social media sites before litigation? Until recently, it was an open question; however, on Jan. 23, 2015, The Florida Bar’s...more
Back to Top