News & Analysis as of

Evidence Code § 1151 – Evidence of Subsequent Remedial Measures Following Shopping Center Robberies

Carl McIntyre, et al. v. The Colonies-Pacific, LLC California Court Of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District (July 31, 2014) California Evidence Code § 1151 excludes evidence at trial of a defendant’s subsequent...more

Fast Five: Rhode Island Appellate Practice - August 2014

Before you file or respond to a motion for summary judgment, consider the following guidance from three recent Rhode Island Supreme Court decisions. 1. TO SURVIVE SUMMARY JUDGMENT, A NON-MOVING PARTY MUST COME FORWARD...more

Due Process Requires US Committee on Foreign Investment to Let the Sunshine In

On July 15 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit told CFIUS (the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States) that constitutional due process requires that parties subject to an...more

Evidence – Expert Witness Testimony – Grounds for Exclusion

City of Pomona v. SQM North America Corporation - Court Of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Nos. 12-55147, 12-55193 (May 2, 2014) - Under Federal Rule of Evidence (“FRE”) 702, expert witness testimony must meet certain...more

The Precedential Value of Seriatim Wisconsin Court of Appeals Opinions

In April we wrote about the Wisconsin Court of Appeals opinions compelling State Senator Jon Erpenbach to produce non-redacted emails under Wisconsin’s Public Records law. Today, the Court of Appeals ordered that the opinions...more

Florida Appellate Court Embraces Daubert Standard And Provides First In-Depth Analysis Under New Law

Last week, the Third District Court of Appeal resolved any questions concerning the applicability of the Daubert standard in Florida following the legislative changes to Florida's evidence code in July 2013. ...more

On Remand, Federal Circuit Comes Around to Supreme Court’s Way of Thinking

Medtronic Inc. v. Boston Scientific Corp. - On a remand from the Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, addressing the issue of the sufficiency of infringement evidence, affirmed a district...more

Appellate Court Notes - Week of December 13

AC34918 - Cuozzo v. Orange - AC34918 Dissent - Cuozzo v. Orange - This is a case where a little more effort should have gone into a Motion to Dismiss. The Appellate Court held that the Trial Court improperly...more

Exceptions in Pennsylvania Orphans' Court Not Necessary to Preserve Weight-of-the-Evidence Claim on State-Court Appeal

In a unanimous en banc decision, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania held on November 12 in In re Estate of William O. Smaling, No. 3353 EDA 2011, that filing exceptions to a Pennsylvania Orphans’ Court order is not necessary...more

Right-to-Know Law Litigants in Pennsylvania Are Now Free to Introduce New Evidence and Arguments During Appeals and After OOR...

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently held in Bowling v. Office of Open Records, No. 20 MAP 2011, 2013 WL 4436219, at *1 (Pa. Aug. 20, 2013), that courts reviewing pending cases under the state’s Right-to-Know Law (“RTKL”)...more

Thriller?

The verdict is in. AEG Live is not liable in the Michael Jackson wrongful death suit. An appeal is a foregone conclusion. But will an appeal be a "Thriller?" The standards of review tend to reduce the possibility...more

Fresh evidence in criminal appeals: what is a “tactical decision” not to call evidence at trial?

Section 683(1) of the Criminal Code allows an appellate court to receive evidence on appeal “where it considers it in the interests of justice”. It is well-established that it is frequently not “in the interests of justice”...more

Tips For Opening Statements And Closing Arguments

Jury trials are supposed to be a forum within which the parties, represented by competent, professional and zealous counsel, present their positions in a coherent, thoughtful and respectful manner to their fact-finding peers....more

District Court Considers Evidence Outside Administrative Record

Helton v. AT&T, Inc. No. 11-2153, 2013 WL 812118 (4th Cir. Mar. 6, 2013) - In Helton v. AT&T, Inc., the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s consideration of evidence outside of the...more

N.Y. Anti-Terror Law Diminishes Pursuit of Terrorism: Lawyer  [Video]

Feb. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Catherine Amirfar, litigation partner at Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, talks about recently obtaining a landmark victory on behalf of her client, Edgar Morales, in the first ever case of a gang member tried...more

Patent Watch: Cephalon, Inc. v. Watson Pharms., Inc.

On February 14, 2013, in, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Reyna, Bryson, Wallach*) reversed-in-part and affirmed-in-part the district court's judgment following a bench trial that Watson did not infringe...more

Seagulls on the Water?¹ Has California Supreme Court Indicated A Major Change in Direction for the Admissibility of Expert Opinion...

California courts have generally granted qualified experts wide latitude in permitting their opinion testimony to be heard by a jury. In the recent case of Sargon Enterprises, Inc. v University of Southern California (2012)...more

Federal Criminal Defense Attorney - Overturning A Guilty Verdict in a Federal Criminal Appeal [Video]

Matt Kaiser, a Washington DC federal criminal defense attorney at The Kaiser Law Firm PLLC (http://www.tklf.com), discusses what you have to show to overturn a guilty verdict on appeal in a federal criminal case. If you'd...more

What issues do people raise in a federal criminal appeal? [Video]

Matt Kaiser, a Washington DC federal criminal defense attorney at The Kaiser Law Firm PLLC (http://www.tklf.com), discusses what issues people normally raise in a federal criminal appeal. If you'd like more information...more

The California Supreme Court Clarifies Trial Courts’ Gatekeeper Responsibility

Until recently, California trial courts were not required to perform the rigorous expert testimony gatekeeping responsibility adopted by federal courts and a majority of state courts. As a practical matter, California’s...more

The Second Circuit Reverses A Conviction For Tax Evasion Based On Insufficient Evidence

Five partners at Ernst & Young - Robert Coplan, Martin Nissenbaum, Richard Shapiro, and Brian Vaughn, and Charles Bolton - were charged with a number of tax crimes in federal court in New York, specifically tax evasion,...more

The Second Circuit Reverses A Conviction For Tax Evasion Based On Insufficient Evidence

Five partners at Ernst & Young - Robert Coplan, Martin Nissenbaum, Richard Shapiro, and Brian Vaughn, and Charles Bolton - were charged with a number of tax crimes in federal court in New York, specifically tax evasion,...more

Judgment On Credit Card Debt Affirmed After Standing Established

In Rogers v. Unifund CCR Partners, the court of appeals held that the evidence of standing and breach of contract was sufficient and supported a judgment for a company based on an amount due under a credit card agreement.No....more

23 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1