News & Analysis as of

Willful Misconduct Attorney's Fees

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - April 2024 #3

Luv N’ Care, Ltd. v. Lindsey Laurain, Appeal Nos. 2022-1905, -1970 (Fed. Cir. Apr.12, 2024) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s bench trial decision that unclean hands...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Massachusetts SJC Rules That Employers May Hold Employees Liable for Violating Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Law

On April 9, 2021, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruled that an employee may be liable to his or her employer under the Commonwealth’s unfair and deceptive trade practices statute - which authorizes an award of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Fifth Circuit Affirms Attorney’s Fee Award of $2.3 million in Misappropriation Case Against Former Employee who Failed to Comply...

On September 2, 2020, the Fifth Circuit declined to void a fee award of nearly $2.3 million in favor of an employer that had prevailed on its trade secret theft claim against its former employee, because the employee...more

Carlton Fields

District of Idaho Rejects Challenges to Arbitration Award

Carlton Fields on

The defendant sought to vacate an arbitration award on the basis of arbitrator misconduct and manifest disregard of the law or, in the alternative, modification of the award....more

Buchalter

A Recent Ruling About the “Willful and Malicious” Standard for Plaintiff’s Recovering Attorneys’ Fees Under the California Uniform...

Buchalter on

The California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“CUTSA”) allows courts to award reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to the prevailing plaintiff in a claim for trade secret misappropriation when a “willful and malicious...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - September 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Finds Claims Issued from Reexamination Co-Pending with Appeal Ineligible Where the Changes Did Not Affect Section 101 Eligibility - In SAP AMERICA, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2081, the...more

Knobbe Martens

In Re Rembrandt Techs., LP Patent Litig.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before O’Malley, Mayer, and Reyna. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A case may be exceptional if: (1) fact witnesses are compensated based on the...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2017

Knobbe Martens on

District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more

Knobbe Martens

Patent Judgments and Awards - Merck Ordered to Pay $14 Million in Attorneys’ Fees to Rival Gilead After a Patent Infringement...

Knobbe Martens on

Merck Ordered to Pay $14 Million in Attorneys’ Fees to Rival Gilead After a Patent Infringement Trial Involving Hepatitis C Drugs - On July 14, 2017, in a stunning reversal of fortune, a federal court in San Jose, CA,...more

Moore & Van Allen PLLC

The U.S. Supreme Court Limits Sanctions to Compensation, Not Punishment

Moore & Van Allen PLLC on

It is not every day the U.S. Supreme Court pays attention to matters that affect the practice of discovery, but that day came with Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. v. Haeger, 581 U.S. ___, 137 S.Ct 1178 (April 18, 2017). Writing...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

A District Court’s Discretion to Sanction Is Broad, “But For” a Causal Limitation

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified in Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger that even a district court’s exercise of broad discretion to impose a civil sanction for a litigant’s bad faith conduct has to be limited by a...more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger Reignites Discussions of Federal Courts’ Inherent Authority

In recent years, discussions regarding the contours of a federal court’s inherent authority to sanction litigants for bad-faith behavior have been heating up faster than a defective tire at highway speeds. In the 2015...more

Morris James LLP

Delaware Supreme Court Affirms Sanctions Award

Morris James LLP on

The Supreme Court affirmed perhaps the largest award of attorney fees as a sanction for bad conduct in Delaware’s history in this very unusual decision. It is a good summary of when a Court may depart from the “American...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Chris Lazarini Comments on Application of Manifest Disregard of the Law

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Chris Lazarini commented on a case in which a former trader fraudulently purchased $1 billion in Apple shares that ultimately forced the closure of the trader's firm, Rochdale Securities. Rochdale...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Attorneys’ Fee Award Cannot Be Enhanced to Deter Misconduct (Lumen View Technology, LLC v. Findthebest.com, Inc.)

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing whether deterrence can play a role in an attorneys’ fee award under § 285, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that once a case is deemed exceptional, § 285 only authorizes an award of reasonable...more

Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC

The “Law’s” Limits On The Bankruptcy Court’s Ability To Impose Sanctions For Debtor Misconduct

In the first six months of 2014 the Supreme Court has already issued two opinions concerning the authority of the bankruptcy courts. The first opinion, Law v. Siegel, 134 S. Ct. 1188 (2014), was issued in March. In Law,...more

16 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide