The Ninth Circuit has told a Russian businessman he must wait to see if he can take funds held in a trust to collect on a $92.5 million arbitration award issued against his former business partner in a dispute over a mall in Moscow, as a court in Liechtenstein is deliberating the very same issue.
A Texas-based nationwide funeral home company lost its bid to dismiss a class action alleging deceptive sales practices when a California federal judge held on Friday that although the evidence is slim that its Golden State subsidiary is an alter ego, there’s enough room for limited discovery.
The University of Southern California and workers who brought a $150 million proposed class action claiming the school mismanaged their retirement savings recently squared off before the Ninth Circuit, crossing swords before a three-judge panel over whether the plan participants' claims should be kicked from federal court into arbitration. Here, Law360 breaks down the oral arguments from the closely watched case.
A Wells Fargo & Co. shareholder has accused CEO Timothy Sloan, Chair Elizabeth Duke and other top brass of having enabled a “culture of lawlessness” at the bank in a derivative suit filed Thursday, the same day that new allegations emerged about a problem in the bank’s wholesale division.
Following closing arguments Friday, the five women and three men of a California federal jury filed out of a San Jose courthouse for a weekend break with a billion-dollar question hanging in the air: How much in damages must Samsung pay Apple for infringing its smartphone design and utility patents?
Tesla Inc. reached a $1 million deal Thursday to end a putative class action alleging the electric-car maker failed to pay overtime and provide proper meal and rest breaks to hundreds of California-based owner advisers and sales advisers, according to court filings.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a $4.5 million settlement resolving wage and meal break claims between Labor Ready Southwest Inc. and a class with more than 200,000 members after rejecting the parties’ earlier agreement, finding Friday that the district court adequately examined the deal’s fairness the second time around.
In this week’s Taxation with Representation, gas pipeline operator Williams swallowed up its master limited partnership Williams Partners for $10.5 billion, Enbridge acquired several of its sponsored vehicles for $8.9 billion, EQT merged its hearing aid business with Widex A/S for $8.3 billion and Zoetis snapped up Abaxis for $2 billion.
Homeowners claiming Citibank NA and JPMorgan Chase & Co. charged them unnecessary fees for property inspections after they defaulted on their loans asked the Ninth Circuit to revive their suits Friday, saying a lower court erred in finding no basis for their racketeering allegations against the banks and inspection companies.
A number of immigrant advocacy groups have urged a California federal judge to consider the “tragic state” of immigration detention centers in light of the U.S. Department of Justice’s suit challenging statutes in California that allegedly obstruct federal immigration law enforcement.
Yahoo Inc. agreed Thursday in California federal court to give cash or a membership credit and up to $300,000 in attorneys’ fees to subscribers of its college-sports site who claim the company has violated state consumer protection laws by automatically renewing their subscriptions without their permission.
The Federal Trade Commission in California federal court on Thursday accused a Florida-based company of scamming small businesses through false threats to remove them from Google search results and sham search engine optimization products.
Natera Inc. on Thursday asked a California federal court to free it from patent infringement litigation brought by competitor Illumina Inc., arguing the fetal DNA testing technology at issue isn’t patent eligible because it covers naturally occurring phenomena.
The Ninth Circuit resurrected a proposed class action alleging that the heart health claims on Pharmavite LLC’s vitamin E supplements are misleading, saying under California law, individual class members don't have to show they relied on the allegedly misleading statements.
BMW asked a California federal court Thursday to reject multidistrict litigation claiming it participated in a decadeslong antitrust conspiracy with fellow German automakers Audi, Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz and others on car technology, costs, suppliers and emissions equipment, saying the buyers’ ill-defined antitrust injuries and illogical claims do not hold up.
A suit alleging that Miami-based home builder Lennar created and bankrupted a development company in order to swindle $970 million from the California Public Employees' Retirement System belongs in a Delaware bankruptcy court, the builder said Thursday.
A California federal judge refused Thursday to certify a class of consumers on false-advertising claims about how much herbicide could be made from bottles of concentrate, saying the lead plaintiff’s own personal claims put him outside the class.
A defense contractor that makes weaponized drones for the military has been accused in California state court of firing an employee who tipped off federal investigators about the company's efforts to cover up an incident in which a worker traveled on a commercial flight with a drone containing a bomb, according to a lawsuit unsealed Friday.
A California federal judge on Thursday rejected an effort by Nissan North America Inc. to partly dismiss a suit that accuses the automaker of violating five states’ consumer protection laws by selling vehicles with defective panoramic sunroofs, saying the latest version of the suit passes muster under the laws of Illinois, California and Colorado.
A California federal judge has granted summary judgment against an estate to deny a $3.8 million estate tax refund, ruling its decedent retained control over assets placed in a trust to fund her annuity.
Personal jurisdiction defenses are waivable and should be pleaded at the outset of litigation. Still, suppose a defendant, not recognizing the impacts of the Bauman and Bristol-Myers Squibb rulings, did not previously plead a personal jurisdiction defense, but now wants to do so. It’s not a good situation to be in, but it’s not hopeless, says James Beck of Reed Smith LLP.
The Delaware Superior Court's decision in Arch Insurance Co. v. David Murdock underscores the importance of the choice of law analysis in insurance coverage disputes and reaffirms a distinction previously recognized, but not always applied, between D&O and general liability policies, say Jennifer Wasson and Carla Jones of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP.
The tug of war over which restaurant employees are entitled to a piece of customer gratuities continues. Seven years after the U.S. Department of Labor issued regulations expressly prohibiting employers from requiring tipped employees to share gratuities with nontipped staff, the rope has moved in the opposite direction, say Marc Zimmerman and Kathryn Lundy of Michelman & Robinson LLP.
In a recent op-ed, former U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens called for repealing the Second Amendment to help combat our nation's gun epidemic. Actually, it is the high court's ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller that is the problem. And it is only one court case away from being renounced as the historic blunder it is, says Robert W. Ludwig, counsel for the American Enlightenment Project.
Despite recent setbacks in state legislatures, this year's carbon tax push has been the most successful in American history, demonstrating that the idea has carved a place in our political landscape, says Ryan Maness, tax counsel at government relations services firm MultiState Associates Inc.
Even if courts begin to consistently dismiss putative nationwide classes based on Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, filing a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction may not always be the best strategic and business decision for defendants, say Neil Tyler and Claudia Vetesi of Morrison & Foerster LLP.
A California appellate court recently upheld a trial court’s summary judgment in a secondary exposure asbestos case where the plaintiffs could offer no admissible evidence that the decedent’s father worked around asbestos-containing materials. While this opinion is unpublished and uncitable under California rules, its legal theory can apply to other cases, says Theresa Mullineaux of Husch Blackwell LLP.
In the first installment of the series, Jeremy Abrams and Sebastian Watt of Reed Smith LLP seek to provide a high-level overview of the most significant corporate state tax issues after the Tax Cut and Jobs Act and use state-specific examples to show that while determining how a state will conform to the Internal Revenue Code is not always clear, taxpayer-friendly results are possible.
In Kelly Ellis v. Google, a California federal judge recently denied Google's bid to dismiss classwide claims alleging gender-based pay discrimination. If the class is certified and if the plaintiffs win, it may signify the beginning of the end of the fight for equal pay for women, say Debra Ellwood Meppen and Laurie DeYoung of Gordon & Rees LLP.
High prescription drug prices are increasingly a focal point in the discussion of U.S. health care spending. While there is little consensus in Congress, there has been considerable recent activity in the federal executive branch and in state legislatures, say Tom Bulleit and Rebecca Williams of Ropes & Gray LLP.