At the core of the definition, a Parallel import is a non-counterfeit product imported from another country without the permission of the intellectual property owner. They are also goods that are not authorized for...more
For nearly 100 years, courts across the country have followed the established majority view that an excess insurer may not avoid its coverage obligation by imposing technical requirements on the manner in which underlying...more
Editor’s Note: In the article below, Manatt discusses the Ninth Circuit’s new opinion in the ongoing Wit v. United Behavioral Health litigation and the changes from the now-vacated January 2023 Wit decision. ...more
On May 25, 2023, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that a post-trial motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 50(b) is not required to preserve appellate review of a purely legal issue resolved at...more
With essential unanimity, though with an array of concurrences in one of them, the Supreme Court ruled against government parties in three cases, two of them in favor of homeowners, and in property rights and environmental...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions: Tyler v. Hennepin County, No. 22-166: This case involved the Fifth Amendment’s “Takings Clause” in the context of seizing property to collect unpaid...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued five decisions: National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, No. 21-468: This case involved a constitutional challenge to California’s “animal cruelty law” known as...more
Plaintiff did not exhaust administrative remedies when challenging the City’s approval of a homeowner’s development project on the ground that a Class 1 categorical exemption was inapplicable. Arcadians for Environmental...more
The United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, No. 21-887, opening the door for future claims against schools for compensatory monetary damages. In its unanimous opinion, the Supreme...more
The United States Supreme Court recently issued a unanimous decision, Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools et al., which provides clarification about the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s (“IDEA”) exhaustion...more
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of a deaf student in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 143 S. Ct. 81 (U.S. 2022), where the Court held that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) exhaustion...more
The Supreme Court unanimously held in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, No. 21-887 (Mar. 21, 2023) that a student can sue for compensatory damages under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) even when they have not...more
Can public school children with disabilities sue their schools for violations of the federal antidiscrimination statutes and collect compensatory damages before exhausting their administrative remedies under the Individuals...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision: Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, No. 21-887: This case considered whether a federal education law’s administrative exhaustion requirements precluded a...more
In Jenkins et al. v. Brandt-Hawley et al. (1st Dist., Div. 2, 2022) ___ Cal.App.5th ___, the First District Court of Appeal found that CEQA suits can be subject to malicious prosecution actions. The Court of Appeal upheld an...more
In a published decision filed March 30, 2022, the First District Court of Appeal (Division 5) reversed a trial court judgment upholding the reissued final environmental impact report (“RFEIR”) for a 44-single family residence...more
Participants in administrative proceedings are routinely cautioned to raise, or "exhaust," all issues with the agency to avoid being barred from later raising those issues in court. But whether a court will require issue...more
Welcome to CICR’s annual review of insurance cases. Here, we spotlight decisions from the last year that you should know about — and a few pending cases to watch. As our picks for “Cases to Know” (below) indicate,...more
Late last year, the High Court of Australia overturned more than 100 years of precedent when it handed down its decision in Calidad Pty Ltd v Seiko Epson Corporation [2020] HCA 41 (Calidad v Seiko). Rather than following the...more
Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. sued OneBeacon Insurance Co. for breach of a facultative reinsurance certificate. Fireman’s Fund settled claims with its insured and allocated a portion of the settlement to a Fireman’s Fund...more
Does marijuana have a currently accepted medical use in the U.S.? That is the question in front of the Ninth Circuit currently. On May 21, 2020, Suzanne Sisley and multiple U.S. veterans petitioned the Ninth Circuit Court of...more
Who owns the stuff you buy? This used to seem so easy. Of course, you own the house, car, refrigerator, books, watch, shoes, pants, and everything else you bought – we always thought so. But not anymore. The companies that...more
In Raymond M. v. Beacon Health Options, Inc., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94615 (D. Utah, May 29, 2020), a Utah district court held that an ERISA plan improperly applied acute-level criteria when denying benefits for a...more
Pfizer, Inc. v. U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, C.A. No. N18C-01-310 PRW CCLD (Del. Super. Aug. 28, 2020) - On cross-motions for summary judgment in a director and officer insurance coverage dispute, the Superior Court...more
Plaintiff Doug Heckman participated in Nike's employee welfare benefit plan (the "Plan"), which was funded by UnitedHealthcare Insurance Co. ("UHC"), and included healthcare benefits. Mr. Heckman's wife was covered under the...more