A Wisconsin federal jury awarded a $14.5 million verdict to a Netherlands-based biotechnology firm over allegations that two yeast producers infringed its patent covering genetically modified yeast cells that boost ethanol production.
A former Barclays PLC trader accused of illegally manipulating a key interest rate told a London jury on Monday he saw nothing wrong in messages from senior managers asking him to help fix Euribor, saying he thought it was normal business practice.
A key witness in the U.S. government's case against Valeant Pharmaceuticals International Inc. manager Gary Tanner, who is accused of scheming to have his employer acquire mail-order pharmacy Philidor Rx Services LLC in exchange for a $9.7 million kickback, told a New York federal jury Monday that he was "concerned" by how close Tanner was with Philidor and what he was doing there.
The production company that has long held the rights to Zorro is facing a trial accusing it of infringing copyrights for a musical about the masked swordsman after a California federal judge ruled Friday the character is in the public domain.
A Pennsylvania appeals court on Monday vacated a hospital's trial victory in a medical malpractice suit, saying the trial judge wasn't present during the jury selection process and therefore is not afforded deference for deciding not to excuse an admittedly biased prospective juror for cause.
President Donald Trump has tapped an Arent Fox LLP alumnus who specializes in litigation, as well as domestic and international arbitration, to help lead the U.S. government's response in situations involving hostages being held abroad.
Attorneys for Apple and Samsung traded juror challenges on Monday at the start of a high-profile California federal trial to determine how much Samsung owes for infringing five of Apple's design and utility patents, winnowing 74 candidates down to a final panel of eight.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld the conviction of two men accused of distributing cocaine and marijuana despite law enforcement's use of a wiretap outside the bounds of the court that issued it, ruling that because the evidence was not admitted at trial and the wiretaps were otherwise sound, the surveillance orders did no harm.
The New York Giants have reached a deal with a sports memorabilia dealer to resolve a New Jersey state court suit alleging the team exposed him to criminal charges to cover up how its equipment staff and quarterback Eli Manning knowingly peddled fake game-worn memorabilia, a team spokeswoman said Monday.
Ironshore Europe DAC asked the Fifth Circuit on Monday to allow it to go forward with its claim Schiff Hardin LLP's bad advice about a product liability trial cost it $34 million, saying the law firm is liable under Texas law.
A New York federal judge has rejected a Utah biodiesel fuel producer’s bid to set aside a $25.3 million verdict stemming from its admitted breach of a fuel purchase contract with a Singapore biofuel trader, holding Monday that the jury’s conclusions were reasonable.
A federal jury for the District of Columbia on Monday found that Desarrollos Aerohotelco CA owes $2.2 million to Bazarian International Financial Associates LLC because it never paid the financial intermediary a debt fee owed for arranging financing for the development of a luxury hotel in Aruba.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear General Motors’ challenge to an Eighth Circuit decision clearing the way for a damages-only retrial for a Missouri man left quadriplegic after a 2012 accident involving a GMC van, even though most of the liability claims against GM were rejected.
The former acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts — best known for leading the case against the Boston Marathon bomber — has joined Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, the firm announced.
Raj Rajaratnam asked the Second Circuit on Monday to toss five of 14 insider-trading counts for which he is serving an 11-year sentence, but a judge at oral arguments said his latest bid for a shorter prison term did not look like something a prisoner who has exhausted his direct appeal would argue in support of a finding of "actual innocence."
After more than a decade at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the agency's former senior trial counsel has decamped for Morrison & Foerster LLP to seek out fresh challenges and take on new clients.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a challenge to the Dodd-Frank Act's criminalizing of a commodities trading tactic known as "spoofing," or entering bogus orders that are meant to move the market, leaving intact a New Jersey trader’s three-year prison sentence.
A Louisiana man convicted of murdering three family members has won a new trial from the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, after the court held that his own lawyer's admission of his guilt violated his rights.
A California federal judge has reduced an award for Microsoft from a jury that found Corel willfully infringed its Office software patents, dropping the payout from $287,000 to $124,000, and declined to make Corel pay Microsoft’s attorneys' fees, saying there was nothing exceptional about the case.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a federal jury's finding for Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co. in an action alleging a failure to accommodate under the Americans with Disabilities Act, rejecting a worker's argument in a published opinion Friday that he should have only had to identify a potential accommodation.
I am often asked, “When there are one or more partner departures, what can a firm do to prevent this from escalating to a catastrophic level?” The short answer is “nothing.” Law firms need to adopt culture-strengthening lifestyles to prevent defections from occurring in the first place, says Larry Richard of LawyerBrain LLC.
Andre Flotron's upcoming criminal trial and the corresponding civil complaint demonstrate that regulators have the appetite to bring spoofing cases based largely on patterns observed in trade data. This data may be supplemented by the allegedly incriminating testimony of witnesses, say attorneys with Dechert LLP.
Given the competing public policies of protecting clients’ right to counsel of their choice, lawyer mobility, and the fiduciary duty partners owe to a dissolved firm, it behooves law firms to carefully review their partnership agreements to make sure they adequately spell out what happens in the unfortunate event that the law firm chooses to wind down, say Leslie Corwin and Rachel Sims of Blank Rome LLP.
The New Jersey Supreme Court may soon decide whether to adopt the Daubert standard for admissibility of expert witness testimony. The searching inquiry into the reliability of proffered expert testimony that is required by Daubert protects the integrity of the jury system by ensuring that jurors are not misled by unreliable evidence, says Timothy Freeman of Tanenbaum Keale LLP.
There has been, of late, significant dispute as to the application of the unfinished business doctrine, particularly with respect to hourly rate matters of now-dissolved large law firms. And the California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Heller Ehrman, like others as to similar points, is highly questionable, says Thomas Rutledge of Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLC.
What if they made a regulatory change and no one noticed? The D.C. Circuit's recent ruling in Citizens Association of Georgetown v. Federal Aviation Administration reaffirms the rule that the appeal clock starts ticking on the day a regulatory order is officially made public, whether affected parties had actual notice or not, says Paul Kiernan of Holland & Knight LLP.
In a case of first impression that may have significant, unforeseen consequences, a division of Johnson & Johnson is seeking to prevent accused infringers from asserting at trial the arguments that were successful in an inter partes review proceeding. The New Jersey federal court should deny the motion, say Roshan Shrestha and Stephen Auten of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that the United States could maintain a suit to enforce terms of an interstate compact — even where it was not a signatory of the compact. This decision offers clues about how the high court might deal with issues of compact construction that have gone unresolved for some time, says Matthew Tripolitsiotis of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP.
Rafferty v. Merck, the recent decision from the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, held that a brand drug manufacturer can be liable for harm caused when a patient takes a generic version of its drug. A particularly troubling aspect of Rafferty is that the court buried the learned intermediary doctrine, says Terry Henry of Blank Rome LLP.
A number of state high courts have recently held brand-name prescription drug manufacturers liable for inadequate labeling claims brought by patients who took generic equivalents. While only a few states have endorsed this doctrine, the trend may be growing, say Monee Hanna and Nicholas Janizeh of Tucker Ellis LLP.