News & Analysis as of

Privity of Contract

McGlinchey Stafford

When Do I Need to Establish Article III Standing? - McGlinchey Commercial Law Bulletin - May 2023

McGlinchey Stafford on

Ohio- Agent’s Liability Under Contract- Nat’l Church Residences v. Kessler, 3rd Dist. Union, No. 2023-Ohio-1437. The Third Appellate District reversed the trial court’s decision to grant the plaintiff summary judgment,...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The CA Supreme Court - July 1, 2022

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Grande v. Eisenhower Medical Center, No. S261247: In this case, a staffing agency arranged for a nurse to work at a hospital. The nurse sued the staffing agency for violating the Labor Code and Unfair Competition Law but did...more

Winstead PC

Court Held That The Estate Planning Privity Rule Barred Granddaughter’s Claim For Malpractice Against Her Grandmother’s Attorneys...

Winstead PC on

In Flores v. Branscomb PC, before her death, the decedent hired counsel to prepare a new will. No. 13-18-00411-CV, 2021 Tex. App. LEXIS 4612 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi June 10, 2021, no pet. history)....more

Tyson & Mendes LLP

Protections Against Implied Warranty of Habitability Claims Broadened in Illinois

Tyson & Mendes LLP on

For many of us of a certain age, our first exposure to the Latin phrase caveat emptor came from an episode of the classic sitcom, The Brady Bunch. “Let the buyer beware” was the lesson Mr. Brady imparted to Greg for his...more

Rumberger | Kirk

Florida Supreme Court: Insurers can Sue Attorneys for Malpractice Under Subrogation Provision

Rumberger | Kirk on

The Florida Supreme Court has given the proverbial “green light” for insurance companies to sue attorneys for negligent representation of an insured. Historically, to bring an action against an attorney for legal malpractice...more

Pillsbury - Policyholder Pulse blog

Is Contractual Privity Required for Additional Insured Status? Courts Are Divided.

In a previous post, we addressed blanket additional insured endorsements and the role they play in passing insurance obligations downstream. In short, the purpose of a “blanket” endorsement is to grant additional insured...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Estoppel in the Name of Different Interests and Claims

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that 35 USC § 314(d) did not bar its review of a Patent Trial & Appeal Board determination that a petitioner was not estopped from maintaining inter partes review (IPR)...more

A&O Shearman

Court of Appeal artfully navigates questions on agency and privity

A&O Shearman on

In Fairlight v Sotheby’s, the Court of Appeal considered whether a line of authorities relating to sub-agency could be applied to preclude privity of contract between the parties, and to excuse Fairlight from returning...more

Jackson Walker

“Parties’ Words Matter” – New Houston Bankruptcy Court Decision in Chesapeake-ETC Dispute Provides Alternative Paths for...

Jackson Walker on

Over the past five years, bankruptcy courts have analyzed whether oil and gas producers’ contracts with midstream oil, gas, and produced water companies may be rejected if they create covenants running with the land. Through...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Chris Lazarini Reviews Whether Privity Exists Between Officers of the United States

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Chris Lazarini reviewed a case questioning whether privity exists between officers of the United States if, in the earlier litigation, the representative of the government had authority to...more

White and Williams LLP

Despite No Privity of Contract, Indiana Appellate Court Holds Additional Insured with UIM Claim May Sue for Bad Faith

White and Williams LLP on

Your friend invites you out to dinner. She offers to pick you up since your house is on the way. As you head toward the restaurant, your friend’s car is sideswiped by a driver who blew through a red light. You are seriously...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: February 2020

Payne & Fears on

Frlekin v. Apple, Inc., -- Cal. -- (2020) - Summary:  The time employees spent on Apple’s premises waiting for and undergoing a mandatory exit search of personal belongings was compensable as “hours worked” under Wage...more

Jones Day

Oil and Gas Industry Update - Sabine Oil Not the Last Word on Treatment of Gathering Agreements in Bankruptcy

Jones Day on

In a leading precedent handed down in 2018—Sabine Oil & Gas Corp. v. Nordheim Eagle Ford Gathering, LLC (In re Sabine Oil & Gas Corp.), 734 Fed. Appx. 64 (2d Cir. May 25, 2018)—the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: Power Integrations, Inc. v. Semiconductor Components...

Semiconductor Components, doing business as ON Semiconductor, petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several claims of Power Integration’s U.S. Patent No. 6,212,079. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituted...more

Payne & Fears

California Court of Appeal Creates Split in Authority Over Scope of Settlement Agreements With Staffing Agencies

Payne & Fears on

On February 6, 2020, in a 2-1 decision, the California Court of Appeal (Fourth District, Division Two) held that an employee's settlement agreement with a staffing agency on a wage-and-hour claim does not necessarily preclude...more

Carlton Fields

Federal Court Dismisses Policyholder’s Third-Party Action Against Reinsurers

Carlton Fields on

A Puerto Rico district court dismissed a third-party action by defendant-policyholder Puma Energy Caribe LLC against the reinsurers of an insurance policy issued by plaintiff Integrand Assurance Co. Puma claimed that the...more

King & Spalding

Bankruptcy Court Rules that Dedications Within Gathering Agreements "Run with the Land”

King & Spalding on

On December 20, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas in Alta Mesa Holdings, LP v. Kingfisher Midstream, LLC (In re Alta Mesa Resources, Inc.) held that dedications in gathering agreements create...more

Hogan Lovells

Hong Kong Law Contract Guide

Hogan Lovells on

Our team in Hong Kong recently developed a Hong Kong Law Contract Guide. The guide discusses relevant legal principles that inform the most common contractual clauses in Hong Kong. The guide offers practical points to...more

Clark Hill PLC

2019 Arizona Case Law Affecting Commercial Real Estate and Lending (September 2019)

Clark Hill PLC on

The following information accompanies a presentation Mike gave to members of the Arizona Commercial Mortgage Lenders Association (ACMLA) on September 10, 2019. Arizona Case Law – Deficiency Liability - Helvetica...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - June 2019

Knobbe Martens on

One-year Clock for Filing IPR Petition Applies to Litigants and Parties that Become Privies of the Litigant Prior to Institution. In Power Integrations, Inc v. Semiconductor Components, Appeal No. 2018-1607, the Federal...more

Jones Day

Post-Filing, Pre-Institution Merger Time-Bars Inter Partes Review

Jones Day on

In Power Integrations v. Semiconductor Components, the Federal Circuit ruled that privy and real-party-in-interest (RPI) relationships arising after a petition is filed but before institution may bar institution under section...more

Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP

Privity and Immunity: The Federal Circuit Issues Two Precedential Decisions Addressing Who Can Petition for and Who Can Be Subject...

Late last week, the Federal Circuit issued Power Integrations, Inc. v. Semiconductor Components Indus., LLC and Regents of the Univ. of Minnesota v. LSI Corp. These two precedential decisions bring further clarity to who is...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit clarifies that a post-filing change in RPI status can trigger the § 315(b) time-bar

Federal Circuit clarifies that a post-filing change in RPI status can trigger the § 315(b) time-bar and that there are exceptions to issue preclusion in IPR appeals - On June 13, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Jones Day

PTAB Designates § 315(b) Time Bar Order Precedential

Jones Day on

In an order designated precedential, the PTAB terminated an instituted IPR proceeding after the petitioner failed to establish that no real parties in interest (“RPI”) or privies had been served with a complaint more than one...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Shared Interest in Invalidating Asserted Claims Can Create Privity and RPI

Addressing the impact of Applications in Internet Time (IP Update, Vol. 21, No. 8) in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determined that a petition was time barred because an...more

106 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 5

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide