Law Firm ILN-telligence Podcast | Episode 92: Ron Davis | Fogler Rubinoff
JONES DAY TALKS®: Class Actions Worldview Guide: Part 1–The United States and European Union
Policyholders vs. Insurers: 3 Arguments to Make When Selecting Defense Counsel & Hourly Rates
Goldberg Segalla Product Liability Series: Containing Nuclear and Thermo Nuclear Verdicts
State AG Pulse | Money, Money, Money: Where does it go and why?
Preparing for Litigation in the U.S.
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
CorpCast Episode 2: Advancement 101
How This Investment Firm Hopes to Revolutionize Litigation in America
On Tuesday, in Lehmann v. WFV Holdings, LLC, Record No. 0201-23-2 (Ct. App. Va. May 14, 2024), available here, the Court of Appeals of Virginia reversed a decision from the Circuit Court of Amelia County, holding that because...more
On 6 October 2023, the UK Court of Appeal (the Court of Appeal) delivered its judgment in Mints v. PJSC National Bank Trust and PJSC Bank Otkritie.1 In its decision, the Court of Appeal confirmed that English courts can enter...more
We recently addressed the Idaho Supreme Court’s decision in 616 Inc. v. Mae Properties, LLC, No. 49190 (Feb. 8, 2023), and specifically the essential elements of a lease. The decision also includes an important appellate...more
Sun Vessel Global Limited (Appellant) v (1) HQ Aviation Limited, (2) Great Lakes Insurance (UK) SE (Respondents) Judgment given on 9 January 2023. Court’s Jurisdiction to reconsider matters before delivery of its perfected...more
A split panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the structure and functions of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) survived yet another constitutional challenge, this time based on the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit updated its earlier opinion to remove language ascribing motive to a prolific inventor’s actions before the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO). Hyatt v. Hirshfeld, Case Nos....more
The Supreme Court of Georgia issued another decision in its recent line of cases opining on the scope and availability of Georgia’s apportionment statute - O.C.G.A. § 51-12-13. This latest decision, Alston & Bird, LLP v....more
If an employee is passed over for a promotion due to alleged harassment, does the failure to promote happen when the employer decides to promote someone else or when the successful candidate actually takes on the role? ...more
As litigation funding becomes more commonplace, courts are having to determine how a wide variety of laws apply to litigation funding agreements. Until now, courts have primarily focused on two issues: 1) whether or when...more
The week before Christmas 2020, I received word from the N.C. Supreme Court that it had denied discretionary review in a case out of Western North Carolina that my client had won in the N.C. Court of Appeals in 2018. We had...more
On September 17, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a bombshell decision: A court may not award an incentive fee to a class representative. This is surprising, if not shocking, as it is standard...more
It may be common to see protest activity on your campus – but thankfully it is not common to see a massive jury award rendered against an educational institute due to that activity. An ongoing dispute at an Ohio college that...more
Most government contract lawyers are already familiar with the Tucker Act (28 U.S.C. § 1491), which gives the U.S. Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction over many non-tort claims against the United States, including contract...more
Scot Vandenberg v. RQM, LLC, 2020 IL App (1st) 190544 - Brief Summary - An Illinois appellate court affirmed the adjudication of a firm's attorney's liens down to zero, where the discharged firm failed to provide any...more
The California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, issued a published decision (North Murrieta Community, LLC v. City of Murrieta, Case No. E072663) on June 8, 2020, that addressed how inconsistencies can arise...more
- The 9th Circuit has held that settlement of a plaintiff’s individual claims moots the appeal of an order denying class certification, unless the settlement agreement specifically preserves the plaintiff’s personal stake in...more
In Amneal Pharmacueticals LLC v. Almirall, LLC, the Federal Circuit professed to address a question it had not considered before: whether attorney's fees and a exceptional case determination was available for fees and costs...more
In its recent decision in H2S Solutions Ltd. v Tourmaline Oil Corp. (H2S Solutions), the Alberta Court of Appeal (Court) clarified the application of Rules 4.29 and 14.59 of the Alberta Rules of Court (Rules). These rules,...more
In cases allegedly involving an interest in real property, the Massachusetts lis pendens statute, G.L. c. 184, § 15, allows the defendant to file a special motion to dismiss frivolous claims. If the trial court allows the...more
Late last month, in a landmark decision heralded by brand owners, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Romag Fasteners, Inc v Fossil Group, Inc that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement suit is not required to show that a...more
Last month, in Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC v. Casper Sleep Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granting summary judgment of non-infringement to...more
On 25 February 2020, the Court of Appeal in Chapelgate Credit Opportunity Master Fund Ltd-v-Money & Others confirmed that the liability of a commercial funder of an unsuccessful action should not automatically be limited to...more
Lawyers love to follow the intricacies of litigation - we read the court decisions and follow matters through trials like some follow the latest happenings in their favorite TV drama. CRST Van Expedited v. EEOC - From...more
On December 6, 2019, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that judicial approval is not required for offers of judgment to settle Fair Labor and Standards Act (“FLSA”) claims made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil...more
The U.S. Supreme Court's recent 9-0 decision in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., Case No. 18-801, informs strategic cost considerations in appeals challenging adverse decisions issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office...more