Podcast - FTC Commissioner Dismissals: Background and Implications
The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
(Podcast) The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
Fifth Circuit Affirms District Court’s Striking of Class Allegations
Eighth Circuit Reverses Dismissal of Putative Class Claims
Nota Bene Episode 98: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Mark on U.S. Antitrust Law for 2020 with Thomas Dillickrath and Bevin Newman
Class Action Suit Against Instagram for New Terms of Service Dismissed
Hutchins v. NJ Transit Corp. and the State of NJ, 2025 WL 18154 (App. Div. Jan. 2, 2025) - In an encouraging adherence to procedural rules, a New Jersey appellate court denied an application to file a late notice of claim...more
Baranowski v. City of Newark, Docket No. A-2262-23, NJ Super., App. Div., Mar 11, 2025 - The plaintiff tripped and fell in a pothole in the City of Newark. There were no complaints reported about this pothole prior to this...more
Supreme Court of New York – New York County Eric Biljetina, et al. vs. Brenntag North America, Inc., et al. In this action, the plaintiffs allege the decedent had asbestos exposure through the use of Jean Nate talcum powder....more
Ninth Circuit Does Flip Turn, Reversing Antitrust Case Against World Aquatics - In a decision that is making waves through the world of competitive swimming, the Ninth Circuit reversed a California district court’s grant...more
Avery v. Next Mile, LLC/DSP, No. A-2506-22 (May 23, 2024) - In this case, the trial was bifurcated to first determine if the accident took place in the course and scope of employment. The petitioner worked as a delivery...more
After over four and a half years of litigation, a New Jersey judge dismissed a claim against a nightclub after a Rutgers University student was fatally struck by a car, reasoning that, while the patron was visibly intoxicated...more
The Delaware Supreme Court heard arguments on June 14, 2023, on a question certified to it from the Third Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals, as to whether medical monitoring claims can be made in Delaware without proof of...more
Specific personal jurisdiction can be a very straightforward concept. If a plaintiff claims to have been injured by a product that the defendant itself sold directly to plaintiff at a store within the forum state, disputes...more
For some time, we have been following the emerging case law on whether companies, such as Amazon, that create an online marketplace for other sellers, may be held liable when products supplied by those sellers cause injury....more
The Ninth Circuit has confirmed in quadrophonic sound that plaintiffs cannot avoid preemption by relying on vague and speculative allegations to establish a parallel claim. The court affirmed the dismissal of four lawsuits...more
Foley Hoag LLP publishes this quarterly Update primarily concerning developments in product liability and related law from federal and state courts applicable to Massachusetts, but also featuring selected developments for New...more
In Erwin-Simpson v. AirAsia Berhad, __ F. Supp. 3d __, No. 18-cv-00083 (CRC), 2019 WL 1317337 (D.D.C. Mar. 22, 2019), the court dismissed personal injury claims by a passenger and her husband arising from spilled boiling...more
In Wendelberger v. Deutsch Lufthansa AG, No. 18-cv-01055, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88532 (N.D. Cal. May 25, 2018), the Northern District of California recently dismissed a claim against Deutsch Lufthansa AG (“Lufthansa”) on the...more
The ability of tattoo artists to protect themselves from negligence lawsuits got a boost from a recent decision of a New York court. The case of Jackson v. Black Ink Tattoo Studio Inc. drew national interest since the...more
Personal Injury Liability, Design Standards, Slavin Doctrine, and Certorari Jurisdiction – Certiorari jurisdiction can arise where two parties in the same legal position move for summary judgment under the same theory...more
The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Campbell v. Air Jamaica, Ltd. is a favorable one for the aviation industry. The court confirmed that non-economic damages, including emotional distress and...more