Section 362(k) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code entitles an individual injured by a willful violation of the automatic stay to recover actual damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, as well as punitive damages in appropriate...more
In a pair of recent decisions, Florida state courts reined in multiple statutes that allow for the recovery of attorneys’ fees. In one decision, the Florida Supreme Court adopted a relatively narrow reading of Florida’s...more
Earlier this month, the Ninth Circuit reversed approval of a class action settlement, finding several indications that the proposed settlement was the result of collusion between the parties and did not adequately serve the...more
On March 29, in a development that provides some measure of relief to businesses operating in West Virginia, particularly within the financial services industry, Gov. Jim Justice signed into law amendments to the West...more
An unaccepted offer of judgment that contains internal inconsistencies and ambiguities as to its scope is neither enforceable nor supports an award of attorney’s fees under Georgia’s Rule 68. Reversing a trial court’s...more
On February 1, 2021, in an unpublished opinion resolving a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) attorney’s fees dispute, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in Batista v. South Florida Womans Health Associates, Inc., struck...more
In Gorbacheva v. Abbott Laboratories Extended Disability Plan, et al., 29 U.S. App. LEXIS 36542 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2019), the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's award of attorneys' fees to an ERISA claimant as...more
California Governor Jerry Brown recently signed into law several bills that will have significant impact on employers’ workplace obligations. Effective January 1, 2019, the new laws will restrict nondisclosure agreements and...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: As profiled in our recent publication of the 13th Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report, the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings have a profound impact on employers and the tools they may utilize to...more
In yet another strongly-worded opinion, the Seventh Circuit rejected the proposed settlement of a Walgreens’ shareholder strike suit in which the class obtained “worthless” supplemental disclosures but class counsel received...more
For several years, we’ve been following an eminent domain lawsuit in Marin County involving Caltrans’ acquisition of 34 acres for a $29.7 million interchange project at the Redwood Sanitary Landfill, which would widen the...more
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 permits a party defending against a claim to make a formal offer of judgment. If the plaintiff either rejects the offer or fails to respond within ten days and eventually obtains a trial...more
On May 4, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Williams v. Chino Valley Independent Fire District, holding that unsuccessful FEHA plaintiffs should not be ordered to pay the defendant’s ordinary...more
In California eminent domain actions, the parties are required to exchange formal settlement proposals 20 days before trial. If the case proceeds to trial, the property owner may recover litigation expenses if its demand was...more