A cooperating witness in the prosecution of ex-American Realty Capital Properties Chief Financial Officer Brian S. Block conceded in a New York federal court Thursday that there were no laws, rules or regulations about the reporting of an earnings metric that Block is charged with falsifying in SEC filings.
Johnson & Johnson urged a California appellate court Thursday to overturn a $48 million jury award for a man who developed a severe skin condition from taking the pain reliever Motrin, saying the jury's "confused" verdict form responses were irreconcilably inconsistent.
A Jordanian payment processor that convinced a New York federal jury to award it $2.8 million in a dispute with MasterCard International Inc. earlier this year urged a judge to reject the card company’s effort to throw the verdict out, saying Wednesday the decision was reasonable.
A Pennsylvania state jury on Wednesday awarded a man $870,000 in a medical malpractice suit accusing a physician of removing the wrong testicle during surgery, finding that the doctor’s “reckless indifference” warranted punitive damages.
A Florida bankruptcy judge on Thursday denied General Electric Capital Corp.'s bid to escape a suit alleging it participated in the $3.6 billion Ponzi scheme orchestrated by Tom Petters, paving the way for the claims to go to a jury.
The Ninth Circuit on Thursday affirmed a $14 million bad faith judgment against Allstate, finding there was sufficient evidence to conclude the insurer could and should have settled the underlying motorcycle collision case.
Former top-ranked golfer Vijay Singh, who is suing PGA Tour Inc. for suspending him over a purportedly illicit, deer antler-derived spray, has urged a New York judge to not let the tour try to undermine a ruling that poised the case for trial.
Eli Lilly and Co. fought back Wednesday against an attempt by a German drugmaker to pin its legal bill on Lilly after winning a $20 million patent verdict, saying that attorneys’ fees are added to judgments only in “exceptional” cases and that this one was anything but.
A Texas federal judge on Thursday denied a broker’s attempt to get a new trial in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s case accusing him of selling $22 million in unregistered investment vehicles that were disguised as partnerships in oil and gas drilling.
The Iran-linked charity fighting a billion-dollar U.S. government asset seizure effort got a key informant to tell jurors Thursday that his personal knowledge of the affairs of a real estate partnership at the heart of the case was before when prosecutors say the charity violated sanctions against Tehran.
Federal prosecutors and attorneys for the Massachusetts pharmacist convicted of racketeering in the 2012 meningitis outbreak traded increasingly personal barbs Thursday as the defendant, pointing to what he sees as government misconduct, asked a judge to toss the case or give him a new trial.
A Connecticut federal jury Thursday found a former supervisor on Nomura's residential mortgage-backed securities desk guilty of one conspiracy count linked to a secret commission allegedly tacked onto transactions, but rendered not-guilty verdicts on most charges against him and two others and hung on a smattering of counts, according to federal prosecutors.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg discusses the value of oral arguments, advice for advocates, and the one thing lawyers do that irks her, in the second of two articles based on an exclusive interview.
An Alaska federal judge put the U.S. government on the hook for $3.8 million after ruling that medical staff at a federally funded health clinic provided negligent emergency room treatment to an Alaska Native woman who went into cardiac arrest and suffered permanent brain damage.
A Nevada federal judge on Tuesday overturned a jury verdict that the creators of “Jersey Boys,” the musical about Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons, had improperly used material from an unpublished book, saying the panel reached the wrong conclusion after a “tedious and complex” trial.
ABC’s lead reporter on news calling a beef product “pink slime” defended his reporting Wednesday to the South Dakota jury hearing Beef Product Inc.’s $1.9 billion defamation claim against ABC, saying BPI’s stonewalling kept him from actually seeing the beef product before going on air.
A Pennsylvania federal jury on Wednesday heard opening arguments in a closely watched pay-for-delay suit accusing drugmaker Ranbaxy of violating antitrust laws by accepting a settlement with rival Cephalon that improperly delayed generic forms of the narcolepsy medication Provigil from the market.
The operator of a fishing tournament was right to deny last year’s winner his $2.8 million prize after he and his crew failed to pass required polygraph tests, a Maryland federal judge said Wednesday, waxing poetic about the names of the competing vessels in a 50-page opinion.
Latham & Watkins LLP has nabbed two partners from Kirkland & Ellis LLP who have represented Deutsche Bank AG in antitrust litigation, including one attorney whose past clients also include Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and drug companies like Teva Pharmaceuticals.
An Iran-linked charity trying to stave off a billion-dollar U.S. real estate asset seizure attacked a key cooperating witness as an opportunist seeking a payday Wednesday, but not before jurors saw documents suggesting the supreme leader of the Mideast power had influence over the charity's New York operation.
Most of the jury consulting on this show has consisted of illegal and unethical behavior amid nonsensical trial practices, but at the end of the day, it has probably not done permanent damage to the U.S. legal system — so far, says jury consultant Roy Futterman as the debut season of the CBS show "Bull" comes to a close.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a New York statute that prohibits identifying a surcharge for credit card users regulates speech and is therefore subject to heightened scrutiny. The impact on how businesses collect or seek reimbursement for the costs of state and local taxes from their customers could be significant, say Eric Tresh and Alla Raykin of Eversheds Sutherland.
Last month, a California federal court dismissed a proposed consumer fraud class action against BMW over soft-closing automatic car doors. While many automotive defect claims are brought as pure product liability actions, the plaintiffs in this case sought to “hybridize” product liability and fraud doctrines. The case illustrates the perils of overreaching, say attorneys from Morrison & Foerster LLP.
In a recent ruling, the D.C. Circuit held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must explain why the existing return on equity for a group of utilities is unjust and unreasonable before moving to set a just and reasonable rate. But the question left unanswered is what additional showing is necessary to overturn an existing rate, say attorneys with Jones Day.
Every lawyer who’s handled a civil case in federal court knows about Rule 30(b)(6), governing deposition procedures. But for many real-world deposition dilemmas, the rule offers little guidance. Last year, an Advisory Committee on Civil Rules subcommittee began considering whether the rule should be amended. Now attorneys must advise the subcommittee how to proceed, says Frank Silvestri Jr. of Verrill Dana LLP.
Personal jurisdiction is a popular corporate defense strategy against mass torts. And based on oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court last month in two important cases, the outlook seems bleak for plaintiffs looking for the right forum in which to seek a remedy, say Leslie Brueckner of Public Justice and Andre Mura of Gibbs Law Group.
The U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling in Venezuela v. Helmerich & Payne should make it easier for foreign states and their agencies and instrumentalities to avoid unfounded suits under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. And plaintiffs can no longer avoid dismissal of their claims by asserting that a factual finding on jurisdiction would also decide a merits issue, say attorneys with White & Case LLP.
Despite an increase in engagement with client feedback programs over the last 15 years, law firms — and their clients — have a way to go before realizing the maximum benefits such programs can deliver, says Elizabeth Duffy of Acritas US Inc.
Following a recent California appellate court decision in Rincon EV v. CP III Rincon, it's likely that sophisticated parties will be discouraged from participating in the California court system in favor of jurisdictions that will enforce contractual provisions such as jury trial waivers, say Jerrold Bregman and Racey Cohn of Brutzkus Gubner Rozansky Seror Weber LLP.
In the penultimate episode of the CBS show "Bull," the team wrestles with a real issue in jury consulting and the legal professions in general: Should we work with an unsavory client? This is an interesting question that plays out in jury consulting firms on a regular basis, says jury consultant and psychologist Roy Futterman of Doar Inc.