In B. Bullen et al. v. CohnReznick LLP, investors in a defunct hedge fund sued CohnReznick, the outside auditor and accountant of the fund. The investors claimed, among other things, that CohnReznick had conspired with the...more
With certain jurisdictions within Pennsylvania being considered highly favorable to plaintiffs, claimants and their counsel often go to great lengths to have suit brought in Pennsylvania. Any long-time litigation...more
Since 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to roll back the expansion of personal jurisdiction by lower courts and has set more limitations on where a plaintiff can sue corporate defendants. We have watched this unfold...more
For the second time in the last three years, the U.S. Supreme Court has addressed the constitutional limits of a court’s ability to exercise jurisdiction over a defendant. The 14th Amendment limits the personal jurisdiction...more
As its term drew to a close, the Supreme Court handed down its latest decision on personal jurisdiction in a case entitled Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., San Francisco Cty. Over the last six years, the...more
On July 5, 2017, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, ruled in favor of our client WolfBlock LLP in the matter of Dutch Run-Mays Draft V. Wolf Block, making it the first published case in a New Jersey court...more
In its two recent 8–1 decisions, BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, the U.S. Supreme Court doubled down on its 2014 landmark personal jurisdiction ruling in Daimler AG v....more
This past Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court drastically changed the landscape of mass tort litigation. In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, the Court found that the State of California did not have...more
Product manufacturers routinely hauled into court in far away, inconvenient jurisdictions can breathe a little easier with the Supreme Court’s decision this week in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California. ...more
On Monday, June 19, 2017, the Supreme Court clarified the limits of specific personal jurisdiction in state courts, holding that a connection between a defendant’s contacts with the forum and the claims at issue remains...more
The U.S. Supreme Court in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, 2017 WL 2322834 (2017) made it harder for plaintiffs to sue in states where their alleged injury did not occur by reversing the Montana Supreme Court’s attempt to assert...more
Hogan Lovells partner Marc Gottridge is the co-head of our global financial services litigation practice. He represents some of the world's leading banks in major class actions, investigations, and commercial litigation in...more
In September, we discussed several new trends in jurisdiction, including an opinion—Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of San Francisco County—in which the California Supreme Court held that hundreds of non-California...more
In its most recent decisions on personal jurisdiction, the Supreme Court has reiterated the distinction between general personal jurisdiction on the one hand and specific personal jurisdiction on the other. As to the former,...more
Determining where to file suit in a subrogation claim can have implications both monetarily and for convenience. Courts must have jurisdiction over a defendant for the case to proceed. The easiest path to jurisdiction is...more
As every manufacturer, distributor, advertiser, or retailer of consumer products likely knows, the location where a lawsuit is brought can have a large impact on the ultimate resolution of the matter. Whether because of...more
On Monday, January 4, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in two appeals that may determine what effect the Supreme Court’s Daimler AG v. Bauman decision will have on the exercise of personal...more
Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more
Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e), filing an Abbreviated Biologics License Application (aBLA)—like filing an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA)— can be an act of patent infringement resulting in ‘artificial’ injury to a patentee....more