Nike Inc. asked an Oregon federal judge on Monday to throw out most of a suit accusing the athletics brand of underpaying and mistreating female employees at its headquarters, bashing the suit as vague and saying the proposed class is too broad for just two women to represent.
Amazon.com LLC pressed its bid Monday to toss a California delivery driver's proposed class action alleging the e-commerce titan and a delivery contractor misclassified drivers as independent contractors to deny them proper hourly wages and meal and rest breaks.
A Ninth Circuit panel said Tuesday that it won’t reconsider its recent decision reviving a putative class action accusing Starbucks of stiffing employees for off-the-clock work, a ruling that came after California’s highest court said the claims weren’t blocked by the federal standard limiting suits over small increments of unpaid time.
Monsanto Co. and BASF Corp. asked a Missouri federal judge Monday to toss a proposed class action by farmers alleging the companies purposely distributed a crop-damaging herbicide and withheld information about its harmful effects in order to profit economically.
Organizations and individuals associated with the Takata Corp. air bag recall litigation urged the Federal Communications Commission to rule that auto safety-related calls and texts are exempt from the Telephone Consumer Protection Act in a series of comments posted Tuesday.
The Florida federal judge overseeing the multidistrict litigation over defective Takata Corp. air bags trimmed the case Tuesday by sending a personal injury suit against Nissan back to Louisiana for case-specific discovery.
A Cummins Pacific LLC rental technician lost a bid for class certification in his suit alleging that the engine manufacturer failed to provide workers with proper meal and rest breaks, after a California federal judge found on Monday that he could not show the alleged violations were common to the proposed class members.
A now-defunct construction firm asked a New York federal judge on Monday to throw out a lawsuit by several workers on a Manhattan building project claiming the company failed to adequately pay overtime wages and cut their pay, saying the workers are forum shopping by filing a state court case with nearly identical claims.
USA Gymnastics has asked a Michigan federal court to dismiss claims against it in 85 lawsuits related to former sports doctor Larry Nassar's sexual abuse of young female athletes, saying most of the claims are time-barred while others fail as a matter of law.
A California federal judge Monday refused to shield the Office of Refugee Resettlement from a court order appointing an independent monitor to oversee whether the agency is meeting the standards of care set for detained immigrant children, rejecting the Trump administration's bid to limit the scope of the monitor's authority.
Investors in U.S. Steel Corp. cannot reboot claims of fraudulent financial reporting in their stock-drop suit against the steel producer after a Pennsylvania federal judge agreed with the company on Tuesday that the shareholders threw away their chance to file an amended complaint.
Coffee Meets Bagel Inc. has been hit with a proposed class action in Illinois state court accusing it of violating the state's Dating Referral Services Act and other laws by refusing to give refunds for canceled premium subscriptions.
A group of automotive part purchasers asked a Michigan federal judge on Monday to sign off on a $5.3 million settlement with Maruyasu Industries Co. Ltd. in wide-ranging multidistrict litigation alleging that manufacturers conspired to fix the price of auto parts.
JPMorgan Chase has urged a New York federal judge not to certify a proposed class of several hundred thousand 401(k) plan participants alleging that the bank mismanaged their retirement savings, saying that the named plaintiffs were satisfied with the plan until they were contacted by lawyers through Facebook ads.
A Michigan federal judge signed off Monday on $33.3 million in attorneys’ fees and expenses for Mantese Honigman PC, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca LLP, Barrett Law Group PA and Larson King LLP, which represented auto dealerships in sprawling multidistrict litigation stemming from antitrust schemes in sectors of the automotive parts industry.
A pair of participants in a DST Systems Inc. retirement plan have hit the information processing firm with a lawsuit in New York federal court claiming that plan assets had been imprudently invested in Valeant Pharmaceuticals International Inc. stock, which eventually tanked.
A proposed class of customers accusing New Balance Athletics Inc. of falsely marketing its “Made in USA” products has once again asked a California federal judge to grant preliminary approval to a $750,000 settlement that was denied in October.
Facebook is urging a California federal judge to toss multidistrict litigation accusing it of allowing third parties to harvest millions of unwitting users' personal information, arguing the plaintiffs have failed to show how any consumer was harmed or that their data was shared without consent.
A Texas federal judge on Monday rejected Exxon Mobil Corp’s request for reconsideration of his decision to let a putative securities fraud class action claiming the oil giant hid its climate change knowledge go forward and also denied the company's’ bid to have the matter immediately appealed.
A class of immigrant minors on Friday urged a California federal judge to bar the Trump administration from implementing a proposed rule that would counter the terms of a longstanding settlement agreement, including by allowing the indefinite detention of families.
In Sheppard Mullin v. J-M Manufacturing Co., the California Supreme Court ruled last month that a law firm's failure to disclose a known conflict with another current client did not categorically disentitle the firm from recovering fees. But the court didn’t provide hoped-for guidance on how to write an enforceable advance conflict waiver, says Richard Rosensweig of Goulston & Storrs PC.
In this monthly series, Amanda Brady of Major Lindsey & Africa interviews management from top law firms about the increasingly competitive business environment. Here we feature Melanie Green, chief client development officer at Faegre Baker Daniels LLP.
In TIAA-CREF Insurance Appeals, the Delaware Supreme Court struck a blow to insurers seeking to avoid responsibility for settlement payments made by policyholders. Though decided under New York law, this opinion opens the door to a fact-specific analysis that may help policyholders facing similar denials, say Catherine Doyle and Jan Larson of Jenner & Block LLP.
In Martinez v. Landry Restaurants, a California state appeals court recently held that the time period during which a federal appeal from an order remanding a case to state court is pending should be included when calculating the “five-year rule” for bringing a case to trial. This shows that all counsel should consider whether to seek a stay of proceedings where the case crosses jurisdictional boundaries, says Karin Bohmholdt of Greenberg Traurig LLP.
A California federal court's refusal last week to reconsider Davis v. Electronic Arts magnifies the manifest errors in its recent decision by ignoring the blatantly obvious identifiability of the former NFL players, says Ronald Katz of GCA Law Partners LLP.
It is at this point axiomatic that the Trump administration is intent on reversing significant portions of the Obama administration's regulatory activity. Interestingly, it seems that courts may pose another major risk to the survival of some Obama-era initiatives, say Andrew Oringer and Samuel Scarritt-Selman of Dechert LLP.
In Sacerdote v. New York University — the first university 403(b) employee retirement plan fee case to go to trial — a New York federal court recently ruled in favor of NYU. Arthur Marrapese of Barclay Damon LLP summarizes the university's fiduciary practices and explains how they helped it prevail at the trial level.
In this new series featuring law school luminaries, Widener University Delaware Law School dean Rodney Smolla discusses teaching philosophies, his interest in First Amendment law, and arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court in Virginia v. Black.
A Massachusetts federal court ruled last year in Gustavsen v. Alcon Laboratories that the plaintiffs’ attacks on the size of eye drops were a challenge to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's approved dose of that product. Last week, the First Circuit affirmed — proving that weak, lawyer-driven litigation can still produce good decisions on preemption, says James Beck of Reed Smith LLP.
This fall, in New Prime v. Dominic Oliveira, the U.S. Supreme Court will be presented with two important questions related to the Federal Arbitration Act’s Section 1 exemption. The ruling could have major ramifications for the transportation industry, where arbitration provisions are often included in employment or independent contractor agreements, says Cary Sullivan of Jones Day.