Midyear Banking Review
If I won my case, why do I need to worry about an appeal?
If there is no binding precedent on point, where does the Supreme Court of North Carolina look for guidance? Which are more persuasive: federal court opinions or North Carolina Court of Appeals opinions? Does the answer to...more
In Estate of Maurice v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 792 Fed. Appx. 499 (9th Cir. Cal. Feb. 5, 2020), the Ninth Circuit held that coverage was excluded under an ERISA-governed disability plan ("Plan"), because the evidence in the...more
Often, trial lawyers minimize the importance of a timely evidentiary objection. Trial lawyers think that appellate courts review evidentiary objections under a deferential “abuse of discretion” standard and that one single...more
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court confirmed that federal appeals courts should apply a deferential standard of review to federal district court determinations regarding the legal sufficiency of EEOC subpoenas....more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision on April 3, 2017, in McLane Co., Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a case which presented the question of what the appropriate standard of appellate...more
In a 7 to 1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that courts of appeals should largely defer to lower courts’ decisions when policing subpoenas issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). By...more
Addressing claim construction issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a claim construction limiting “communications path” to wired communications. Ruckus Wireless, Inc. v. Innovative Wireless...more
Addressing the issue of distinctiveness, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s (TTAB) decision to deny registration of a plaintiff’s mark due to the dearth of evidence supporting the plaintiff’s...more
On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court provided guidance on the standard of review for claim construction on appeal in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-854. The Court held “[w]hen reviewing a district...more