Mealey Publications™
TOP STORIES
SAN FRANCISCO — One day after a group of plaintiffs announced a mid-trial settlement of their privacy claims against the maker of an ovulation tracking app, a California federal jury on Aug. 1 found co-defendant Meta Platforms Inc. liable under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) for participating in the interception of the app users’ personal communications.
FORT WORTH, Texas — A Texas federal judge on Aug. 1 granted summary judgment in favor of a vape company and ruled that a more than $20,000 civil penalty levied against it through an administrative proceeding initiated by the Food and Drug Administration is unconstitutional and violates the company’s right to a jury trial, citing SEC v. Jarkesy.
RICHMOND, Va. — A North Carolina federal bankruptcy court did not err in denying a motion by an asbestos claimants’ committee to dismiss the Chapter 11 case of Georgia-Pacific spinoff Bestwall LLC, a divided Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held Aug. 1, finding that “federal courts have subject-matter jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases filed by debtors who may be able to pay their obligations.”
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 1 affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part a lower court’s dismissal of a suit by two John Does’ asserting claims against Twitter Inc. (now known as X Corp.) for violations of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), negligence per se and product liability for allowing purported child pornography to stay on the social media platform, finding that while Twitter is immune pursuant to Section 230 to the federal law claims and some product liability claims, negligence and defective reporting-infrastructure design claims are not barred by Section 230.
SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals majority on Aug. 4 affirmed a lower federal court’s grant of a business and management indemnity insurer’s motion to dismiss a venture capital firm’s breach of contract lawsuit, agreeing with the lower court that a restitutionary award made by arbitrators is not insurable under California law.
TRENTON, N.J. — New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin announced Aug. 4 that the state has reached an agreement under which the Chemours Co., DuPont de Nemours Inc. and Corteva Inc. will pay $875 million to resolve all claims brought against 3M Co., EIDP Inc., formerly E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., and its affiliates related to contamination from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) stemming from activity at DuPont’s Chambers Works plant.
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 1 stayed pending appeal a trial court’s preliminary injunction issued in a case by six unions suing over a March executive order that limited certain federal workers’ rights to organize and bargain collectively.
BROOKLYN, N.Y. — In a suit alleging Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) violations against multiple diagnostic imaging providers and related parties, a New York federal judge denied the providers’ motion for reconsideration of the court’s prior order denying dismissal, finding that GEICO has established damages to show that the RICO claims are ripe.
PHILADELPHIA — A Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel reversed a trial court’s dismissal of a New Jersey family farm’s claims that the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) unlawfully assessed hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines through in-house administrative proceedings for alleged violations related to the federal H-2A visa program for migrant workers, stating the case should be “decided by an Article III court” based on a 2024 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
PHILADELPHIA — A judge properly certified an asbestos talc securities class after finding that each of six disclosures about the safety of talc or the presence of asbestos in Johnson & Johnson talc led to a drop in the company’s stock price, a divided Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said in a divided nonprecedential opinion affirming class certification.
JACKSON, Miss. — A federal judge in Mississippi should explain how a ruling came to include nonexistent parties, facts and quotes and preserve both the original incorrect opinion and a subsequently issued replacement, defendants in a case challenging a state law banning the teaching of “divisive” topics say. The plaintiffs moved to file a second amended complaint in the wake of Trump v. CASA, which limits injunctions to named parties.