A Washington state appeals court Tuesday affirmed the win of a doctor sued for malpractice after treating an intravenous drug user who developed a fatal case of skin cancer, finding that the patient’s substance abuse history was fair for jurors to consider.
3M Company cut an $850 million deal with the state of Minnesota to resolve allegations it knowingly dumped chemicals into groundwater, impacting local wildlife and posing health risks to nearby communities, just as the dispute was set to go to trial, the parties announced Tuesday.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined Tuesday to take up the appeal of two Florida mental health counselors who tried to get new trials after they were convicted of conspiracy for their roles in a $63 million Medicare and Medicaid fraud and kickback scheme.
A case that helped redefine product liability law in Pennsylvania was teed up for a new trial Friday after the state’s Superior Court said jurors had not been properly instructed on how to determine whether steel tubing linked to a lightning-sparked house fire was legally defective.
A contract fight between a food tray maker and a shrink-wrap supplier will not see Supreme Court review, the high court said Monday, leaving intact a trial court's August reinstatement of a $3 million verdict and the deletion of a smaller retrial verdict.
Attorneys for former Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP partner Evan Greebel on Saturday gave the most detailed account to date of a raft of purported jury misconduct they say plagued the trial of the onetime attorney to Martin Shkreli, arguing that Greebel’s conviction should be quashed.
A Kentucky appeals court has upheld the trial win of a doctor accused of failing to diagnose a woman's breast cancer before it spread, rejecting the woman's claim that the trial court allowed testimony it shouldn't have.
A Delaware federal judge dismantled a Merck & Co. unit’s $2.5 billion jury verdict win over Gilead Sciences Inc. in an infringement suit over a hepatitis C drug patent, finding Friday that the patent’s claims weren’t specific enough for an experienced scientist to successfully re-create the formula.
Holland & Knight LLP urged a California appellate panel on Friday to undo a jury's $34.5 million award to a real estate investor who sued the firm over fraud and malpractice, arguing that the firm had no knowledge of alleged wrongdoing surrounding the investor's transactions and that the jury improperly awarded duplicated damages.
A Delaware judge refused Thursday to grant a new trial for a doctor hit with a $4.5 million judgment over negligence in the delivery of a baby, saying a jury was shown enough evidence to back up its verdict, and that $3 million in damages was reasonable.
A Nevada homeowners association was hit with a $20 million jury verdict Friday in a suit brought by a teenager who sustained a traumatic brain injury after the top bar of a swing set broke and hit him in the head.
A man convicted in two separate multimillion-dollar fraud cases told the Second Circuit on Thursday that he suffered from ineffective counsel, saying his attorney never told him about a deal that would have consolidated his guilty pleas and potentially taken more than two years off his sentence.
It may seem like a nightmare scenario for a trial attorney: giving a closing argument and feeling the majority of the jury is going against you. But trial attorneys say that as long as you know there's one juror committed to your case who's been armed with your arguments, a verdict in your favor is no dream.
A settlement between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and former Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP chief financial officer Joel Sanders, who was convicted of fraud, rests on the outcome of Sanders' criminal appeal, a Manhattan federal judge heard Friday.
A judge overseeing the military commission prosecuting the alleged mastermind of the deadly USS Cole bombing has halted the case, citing his ongoing frustration with defense attorneys who are allegedly rebelling against the military commission system.
A Virginia federal jury on Thursday awarded a Texas door manufacturer $58.6 million in its antitrust suit against a supplier of molded door skins, a crucial door component, finding the supplier violated antitrust law by acquiring a competing supplier and overcharging the door-maker for components.
AT&T Inc.’s bid to have Makan Delrahim, head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, testify in the case challenging its planned purchase of Time Warner Inc., could help the company argue that the challenge was politically motivated, but it may not be easy and comes with some risk.
A Harris County, Texas, jury on Thursday awarded a patient $6.6 million in a medical malpractice lawsuit, finding that two doctors were liable for failing to diagnose and treat a blood clot that left her with permanent medical issues.
A construction contractor appealing the loss of an employee wage suit was met with sanctions from the Seventh Circuit on Wednesday and a stern rebuke over practically every facet of the appeal, from its "naked assertions" to the flouting of local rules mandating supporting documentation.
A Pennsylvania attorney facing part of a $2.3 million verdict for abusive probate litigation against a former Cozen O'Connor partner should not receive a new trial, the winner of that verdict argued in a state court filing Wednesday, saying a pending appeal in the case invalidated claims that an expert committed perjury.
Multidistrict litigation is an ever-expanding driver of product liability litigation, but when the MDL process runs its course there is often still a trial to be had, and there are strategic and practical decisions to consider once a case has been remanded. Brandon Cox and Charissa Walker of Tucker Ellis LLP offer tips on how to navigate the remand process.
As litigation funding becomes more widespread, greater complexity and variability in funding deals are to be expected. All claimants should consider certain key questions on the economics of single-case funding when considering or comparing funding terms, says Julia Gewolb of Bentham IMF.
In light of increased recent scrutiny from the California Legislature, local and federal governments, and the plaintiffs bar, retailers offering subscriptions and other auto-renewal programs should closely review their advertisements, sign-up procedures and confirmation materials to make sure they are protected from litigation, say Stephanie Sheridan and Meegan Brooks of Steptoe & Johnson LLP.
The American public increasingly perceives that powerful people and institutions use their authority in selfish ways. And in the courtroom, jurors are homing in on where the power lies in a case story, and how that power is used. Those of us in litigation must heed the messages jurors are sending, says Melissa Gomez of MMG Jury Consulting LLC.
Given the operational and security risks involved, and the substantial digital asset values transacted, the rise of distributed ledger technology and smart contracts will create new opportunities and responsibilities for transactional lawyers, say attorneys with Potter Anderson Corroon LLP.
By taking senior status this year, Judge Dennis Shedd and Judge William Traxler will vacate two of the Fourth Circuit’s 15 judgeships, leaving two slots open for appointments by President Trump. Although the two new judges are unlikely to upset the status quo, litigants may face an increased likelihood that their panel will be composed of Republican-appointed judges, says Kevin Elliker of Hunton & Williams LLP.
A witness who has been told what to do and what not to do will be ineffective at best. Instead, witnesses must be taught how to handle the process, and how to approach the answer to every question that they encounter. These are new skills, and they must be practiced in order to be learned, says Ric Dexter, an independent litigation consultant.
Law firms claim they create client teams to improve service. Clients aren’t fooled, describing these initiatives as “thinly veiled sales campaigns.” Until firms and client teams begin to apply a number of principles consistently, they will continue to fail and further erode clients’ trust, says legal industry coach Mike O’Horo.
In U.S. v. Parnell, the Eleventh Circuit recently upheld the longest criminal sentences ever imposed in a food safety case. The court's opinion underlines the abiding significance of the criminal sanction within the food safety landscape, say Robert Hibbert and Hilary Lewis of Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration compliance evidence was for decades admissible evidence in product liability litigation, until rulings in pelvic mesh cases began to change the law. But last week, the judge in the Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation held such evidence admissible, giving product liability defense counsel a clearly articulated and compelling argument, says James Beck of Reed Smith LLP.