Things move slowly in the dog days of summer, but expect the world of copyright law to speed up in the second half of the year, with highly anticipated decisions and developments on mass digitization, the controversial “Innocence of Muslims” ruling, Aereo's bid for a compulsory license, and more.
With the Eleventh Circuit's recent ruling backing Florida's “gun gag” law restricting doctors from asking patients about firearm ownership, First Amendment experts fear that the decision will be used to encroach on private speech not just by doctors but also by lawyers and other licensed professionals.
The Third Circuit's ruling that courts, rather than arbitrators, should decide whether classwide arbitration is available when an agreement is silent on that point will encourage some employers that had been on the fence about arbitration to embrace it as a means to counter the surging tide of costly wage-and-hour class actions, lawyers say.
Plaintiffs who recently won challenges to Florida's same-sex marriage ban in parallel suits in Miami-Dade and Monroe counties are asking an appeals court to consolidate the cases and present the state's appeals to the Florida Supreme Court for immediate consideration.
The Fifth Circuit on Wednesday upheld the dismissal of a suit accusing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of sinking a property deal between two companies by improperly designating the property as wetlands under the Clean Water Act, thwarting plans to turn the site into a landfill.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey on Wednesday freed AT&T from a workers’ compensation claim, ruling a widower failed to demonstrate his late wife’s fatal blood clot resulted from extended periods of sitting while working from home for the telecommunications giant.
Based on the Florida Supreme Court's recent ruling that an insured's breach of a compulsory medical exam provision does not qualify to automatically terminate an insurance policy, a Florida appeals court Wednesday remanded a similar case back to the trial court.
The Texas attorney general’s office has asked the Texas Supreme Court to find that it’s immune from a whistleblower suit brought by a former child support division attorney who claims she was fired after refusing to sign a false affidavit against a family court judge.
The Eighth Circuit on Wednesday upheld the dismissal of a wrongful death action brought against R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Philip Morris USA Inc., holding that the dead man's relatives could not sue over his death because they had already brought a personal injury suit.
The Ninth Circuit has ruled that a key securities law was never intended to ban the use of evidence requested prior to discovery freezes, reviving a class action Wednesday against the bankrupt maker of an electronic scratch-off card and greenlighting investors' evidence related to a catastrophic merger rollback.
Former property owners involved in an eminent domain case with the city of Tampa are not entitled to interest on funds the county clerk held during the proceedings because those funds were not considered in their possession while accruing interest, a Florida appeals court ruled Wednesday.
The Ninth Circuit on Wednesday reversed a lower court’s ruling that held an insurer liable for covering settlement costs in four sexual abuse suits against priests in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix, finding an assault and battery exclusion in the policy barred coverage for the diocese.
The United Kingdom’s Upper Tribunal on Wednesday upheld a regulator’s ban of former hedge fund CEO Alberto Micalizzi from working in financial services for lying to investors about losses involving a fund he ran at now defunct Dynamic Decisions Capital Management during the credit crisis.
Apple Inc. on Monday urged the Federal Circuit to uphold a $930 million judgment as part of an ongoing smartphone patent infringement suit against Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., saying its rival presented no evidence to overturn a jury's infringement verdict and damages award.
The Sixth Circuit on Wednesday revived a collective action accusing KeHE Distributors LLC of stiffing employees on overtime pay, saying that a lower court was wrong to rule that an exception for outside salesman under the Fair Labor Standards Act applied.
The Mennonite owners of a Pennsylvania furniture manufacturing company who unsuccessfully argued that the new federal mandate that they pay for contraceptive services violated their First Amendment rights asked a Pennsylvania federal court Wednesday to block the requirement, following the U.S. Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision.
The Fourth Circuit on Tuesday sent the National Labor Relations Board's case alleging Nestle Dreyer's Ice Cream Co. had violated federal labor law back to the board for reconsideration in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent Noel Canning decision invalidating three NLRB recess appointments.
An Illinois appeals court has backed a trial court's decision to set aside Pekin Insurance Co.'s victory in litigation over additional insured coverage for a general contractor targeted in an injury suit, paving the way for Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London to jump into the fight.
A group of authors, historians and citizens concerned about a $350 million plan to renovate the New York Public Library asked a state judge on Tuesday to reconsider a June dismissal of their suit, saying the decision was issued erroneously after the library announced that it would revise the plan.
In a precedential ruling, the Third Circuit determined Wednesday that whether an arbitration agreement permits classwide arbitration is a question for courts — not arbitrators — to decide, siding with Robert Half International Inc. in its challenge to an arbitrator's ruling that its agreements with former staffing managers allowed class proceedings.
Heightened focus on commonality and the other Rule 23 prerequisites post-Dukes has been a tremendous hurdle for toxic tort class action plaintiffs as courts reject classes based on the individual nature of exposure, causation and damages and the insufficiency of expert testimony, say attorneys at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP.
Recent decisions show that, at the U.S. Patent and Trademark office, the Federal Circuit's so-called lead compound analysis has not displaced traditional approaches to analyzing chemical obviousness. Therefore, the forum where a chemical obviousness battle is played out can have a big impact on the results, say Jeffry Nichols and William Carroll of Brinks Gilson & Lione.
In a departure from Jewel v. Boxer, the decisions in the cases of Thelen LLP and Heller Ehrman LLP reflect a shift in the manner by which courts treat trustees’ claims for post-dissolution fees, say Angelo Savino and Julie Moeller Albright of Cozen O'Connor.
As the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation heads to the “Heart of America” for its July 31 hearing, this column will take a bit of a detour from its regular format and present a top 10 list of arguments — some strange, yet true — made in support of a particular MDL venue, says Alan Rothman of Kaye Scholer LLP.
It has been argued that an expansive reading by a district judge of a stringent Massachusetts employment classification law in Awuah v. Coverall North America — now pending in the First Circuit — puts the state’s robust franchising business in jeopardy by, among other things, disincentivizing franchisees from supplying their financial capital into new and existing franchises, say Barry Guryan and Jeffrey Ruzal of Epstein Becker & Green PC.
The Seventh Circuit In Hartland Lakeside Joint No. 3 School District v. WEA Insurance Corp. remanded to state court a dispute over the distribution of funds from the Affordable Care Act for failure to present a federal question under Grable, which regrettably did not create the sort of bright-line rule that often does and should govern issues of federal jurisdiction, says Eric Pearson of Foley & Lardner LLP.
Despite the employee-friendly nature of California courts and their occasional rendering of arbitration agreements as unenforceable, two recent Ninth Circuit rulings in Davis v. Nordstrom Inc. and Johnmohammadi v. Bloomingdale’s Inc. may make challenges to class-claim waivers a thing of the past, says Lori Phillips of Sherman & Howard LLC.
For defendants, perhaps the most important task will be to impress upon trial judges just how rigorous plaintiffs must be to meet the Supreme Court of Texas' standard in Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. — any failure to present an opinion based on generally acceptable methodologies as to any component will doom the plaintiff to summary judgment, directed verdict or reversal on appeal, says James Smith of Porter Hedges LLP.
This week, the Eleventh Circuit will hear appeals in two Telephone Consumer Protection Act cases centered on whether a Rule 68 offer of judgment can completely moot a class action. While the court may follow suit and adopt either the Seventh Circuit or Ninth Circuit rule, the door is open for a decision that changes the class action landscape, say David Carpenter and James Cash of Alston & Bird LLP.
For industry, the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Association of American Railroads v. Department of Transportation will be about whether the standards Amtrak helped create will survive and be used to measure how the railroads adhere to their long-standing statutory obligation to give priority to Amtrak trains, says Kevin Sheys of Nossaman LLP.