In Clay v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit predicted that the Illinois Supreme Court would hold that the legislature’s amendment to the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a respondent in a US International Trade Commission proceeding may not seek a mandatory stay of a companion federal district court case under 28 U.S.C. § 1659(a)(2) by...more
A significant and rapidly developing split has emerged among federal district courts regarding whether claims under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) can advance based on the use of common website tracking...more
The Supreme Court has recently addressed, and will soon further clarify, the scope of liability facing government contractors. In The GEO Group, Inc. v. Menocal, the Court issued a unanimous decision limiting interlocutory...more
While we will write lengthier posts for cases that merit a broader discussion, as we did in our last post with respect to the Xamplas decision, we also will write brief updates for notable cases issued recently...more
The Law Court typically may only consider an appeal of a “final judgment”—that is, a decision that fully decides and disposes of the parties’ entire case and leaves no further questions for consideration. However, this “final...more
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s latest decision has delivered a meaningful win for businesses relying on arbitration agreements. By holding that orders compelling arbitration are not immediately appealable, the decision...more
Plaintiffs cannot avoid arbitration through premature appeals challenging the validity of an arbitration agreement. In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, in a 6-0 opinion, recently held that a trial court...more
On February 25, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States issued two decisions: GEO Group, Inc. v. Menocal, No. 24-758: This case interprets the scope of federal appellate courts’ jurisdiction to review collateral...more
In a unanimous opinion, the US Supreme Court ruled that the improper dismissal of a non-diverse defendant meant the district court lacked diversity jurisdiction and remanded the case back to the state court. This is the...more
Facing a $10BB certified TCPA class action, late last year Liberty Home Guard threw up a Hail Mary. It asked the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to take an extraordinary interlocutory appeal of the ruling certifying the case...more
In September 2025, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court tackled a significant procedural issue: whether an order compelling arbitration in ongoing litigation is immediately appealable as a collateral order. In Chilutti v. Uber...more
In In the Estate of Wheatfall, after Hugh Wheatfall died in 2018, Isaiah Wheatfall filed for letters of administration in February 2019, claiming intestacy, and Theresa DeBose filed to probate a 2009 will one week later. No....more
The Texas attorney immunity doctrine is a defense that generally insulates attorneys from being sued by non-clients for legal work the attorney performed within the scope of representing a client....more
We’ve previously written about the split among federal courts as to whether the agent of a non-U.S. country can waive that country’s immunity from suit under the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act or “FSIA”. Briefly, in...more
Join us Thursday, February 12, from 2 to 3 p.m. EST for our webinar, “§ 1983 Qualified Immunity Appeals: Procedure and Strategy.” During this webinar, our presenters will discuss: what is § 1983 liability; scope of § 1983...more
Q: I was appointed receiver based on an ex parte motion. The court subsequently confirmed my appointment. The defendant vigorously opposed my appointment and has threatened to appeal. ...more
Key Takeaways: Sixth Circuit FCA precedent remains intact. The Sixth Circuit declined to entertain constitutional challenges to the FCA’s qui tam provisions, emphasizing that binding circuit precedent forecloses arguments...more
On December 18, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed Longhorn IP and Katana Silicon Technologies’ interlocutory appeal from a district court order requiring an $8 million bond under...more
A federal district court in New York recently denied a franchisee’s motion to amend its complaint and its motion to file an interlocutory appeal of the court’s dismissal of its breach of contract claim. Michell v. McDonald’s...more
The United States District Court for the Central District of California granted Defendant Monarch Healthcare, A Medical Group, Inc.’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff Liseth Aguirre alleged she received phone calls from...more
MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC. v. LONGHORN IP LLC - Before Lourie, Schall, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho. Immediate appellate review may be unavailable for interlocutory bond orders...more
Micron Tech., Inc. v. Longhorn IP LLC, 2025 WL 3672528 (Fed Cir. Dec. 18, 2025) - Instead of decking the halls for Christmas, the Federal Circuit decked Longhorn by dismissing its appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Idaho,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reaffirmed strict limits on interlocutory review, finding that a bond order, even one imposing significant financial obligations, is not directly appealable....more
As I discussed at the big TCPA Summit the case law is somewhat fractured on the issue of whether SMS messages are “calls” for purposes of the TCPA’s DNC rules following McKesson....more