A federal jury in North Carolina awarded a couple there $25.13 million on their nuisance claims against a pork company over the feces, urine and associated odors and flies at a hog farm near their property.
Once again, Justice Stephen Breyer was the most talkative member of the U.S. Supreme Court during oral arguments, but another member of the court turned heads by speaking out 50 percent more than she did in the prior term.
A handful of law firms argued multiple cases during the latest high court term — with varying degrees of success. Here’s how the familiar law firms fared in some of the most high-profile cases of the year.
Back at full strength, the justices worked their way through a docket full of blockbusters. Here’s our data-driven look at the term that was.
Over three decades on the Supreme Court, Justice Anthony Kennedy perhaps became best known for upholding the constitutional right to abortions and to same-sex marriage, but his deference to states’ rights and his inclination to take a race-blind approach to legal analysis have complicated his civil rights legacy.
A Florida judge said Friday he is leaning toward vacating a nearly $1 million jury award for a former city of Miami independent auditor who says he was fired for reporting securities violations, with the judge now weighing that the whistleblower did not go to Miami’s Civil Service Board with his retaliation claim before filing suit.
A New York federal judge declined Friday to force prosecutors to provide evidence to former Adidas employees and a former NBA agent charged with participating in a corrupt scheme to co-opt promising high school athletes.
Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. have reached a settlement in their epic smartphone patent feud, but several rulings during the seven-year dispute will have a lasting legacy. Here’s a look back at some key decisions in the case and their influence on patent law.
A New Jersey state appeals court ordered a new trial on Friday for a widow whose asbestos judgment was reduced when damages were allocated among nine companies, ruling that a lower court improperly allowed evidence from companies which weren’t represented at the trial to help a jury determine their share of liability.
A New York federal judge set a January trial date for former executives of Platinum Partners accused of a $1 billion securities fraud scheme in which they allegedly inflated the value of investments and duped bondholders of defunct offshore driller Black Elk.
A California jury held Friday that Landmark Worldwide owes its former firm Seyfarth Shaw LLP $133,000 for unpaid work on an employee's discrimination suit, rejecting the self-help company's allegation that the firm committed malpractice by not advising it to claim insurance in the case.
Attorneys for Paul Manafort told a Virginia federal judge Friday that they intend to seek a change of venue for his rapidly approaching tax and bank fraud trial, saying government leaks and media coverage have poisoned public sentiment toward the former Trump campaign chairman.
President Donald Trump said Friday he will announce his nominee to take Justice Anthony Kennedy’s place on the U.S. Supreme Court on July 9, and that he has narrowed down the pool of candidates to “around” five people, including two women.
Non-economic damages are supposed to compensate victims for their mental and physical pain and suffering, not punish doctors in malpractice cases, a doctor and hospital argued Thursday in Pennsylvania federal court as they fight a $47 million jury verdict that they argue "simply defies common sense."
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the longest-serving active member of the U.S. Supreme Court, announced his retirement Wednesday after three decades on the high court. Here, Law360 analyzes his immense impact and what his departure means for the future of the court.
AbbVie Inc. and an affiliate must pay $448 million in the Federal Trade Commission’s suit alleging they netted more than $1 billion after bringing sham patent lawsuits to stave off generic competition to AbbVie’s AndroGel testosterone replacement drug, a Pennsylvania federal court ruled Friday.
An ex-Norris McLaughlin & Marcus PA partner was sentenced to more than two years in federal prison on Friday after being found guilty on bribery and conspiracy charges for attempting to land legal work for his firm with promises of campaign contributions to the now-convicted mayor of Allentown, Pennsylvania.
A New Jersey state judge on Friday upheld verdicts totaling $117 million in damages against Johnson & Johnson and its talc supplier over claims that a man’s decades-long exposure to the pharmaceutical giant’s alleged asbestos-containing talcum powder contributed to his mesothelioma.
An Illinois appellate panel on Thursday reinstated a $15.2 million jury verdict in favor of a man severely injured by a forklift while working for an exhibitor at a trade show, saying a $3 million punitive damages award for willful conduct was supported by the evidence.
Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy spent his three decades on the high court making a name for himself as a champion of individual freedoms, but he also authored the majority opinion in Ashcroft v. Iqbal that changed corporate litigation so much, it is cited in nearly every dismissal bid and has become the bane of the plaintiffs bar.
On May 17, 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Brown v. Board of Education, recognizing a moral and legal truth that should be beyond question in American society. The refusal by some of President Donald Trump's judicial nominees to say whether they believe the case was decided correctly is indicative of the narrow-minded elitism they would bring to the bench, says professor Franita Tolson of the University of Southern California's Gould School of Law.
In deciding whether cloud computing is right for the organization or firm, an attorney must consider cloud computing’s significant impact on the electronic discovery process, say Daniel Garrie, managing partner at Law & Forensics LLC, and David Cass, chief information security officer at IBM Cloud.
The IRS argument in a case pending before the U.S. Tax Court was similar to the principal purpose tests laid out by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the European Commission. To that extent, European and Canadian tax advisers who face application of a principal purpose test under domestic law or a tax treaty should take note of the court's ruling, say Rusudan Shervashidze and Stanley Ruchelman of Ruchelman PLLC.
In these politically divisive times, many ask whether our institutions and traditions can help us return to a greater consensus. In days long past, the legal profession could have been counted on to serve just such a function. But lawyers are now just as polarized as everyone else, says Samuel Samaro of Pashman Stein Walder Hayden PC.
While Federal Express succeeded at summary judgment and juries twice found in its favor in Hussain v. FedEx, the path to its recent victory was a long and likely costly one. Employers seeking to mitigate the risk of similar promotion-related discrimination claims should bear in mind the factors that led the Seventh Circuit to reverse the district court's summary judgment, say Jill Vorobiev and Adam Weiner of Reed Smith LLP.
The Apple v. Samsung design-patent retrial — scheduled to begin on Monday — is an opportunity to clear up confusion on remedies. However, the complicated test that will be used for determining the article of manufacture presents the risk of creating more confusion, say Derek Dahlgren and Spencer Johnson of Rothwell Figg Ernst & Manbeck PC.
After moving into a new law office, tenants often file their signed leases away, figuring that the terms are set for a few years at least. However, leases can be very flexible instruments, and should be reviewed annually even if nothing seems amiss, says Tiffany Winne of Savills Studley Inc.
Based on his experience as a BigLaw associate for six years and now as general counsel for a tech startup, Jason Idilbi of Passport Labs offers some best practices for newer associates — whether they are serving external clients or senior attorneys within their firms.
As courts increasingly rely on electronic docket monitoring systems, they have reached inconsistent outcomes on whether a defendant can "snap remove" a case to federal court. The various approaches taken by Illinois courts show that defendants must weigh the risk that removal will fail against the time and expense involved in removal, say Amy Rubenstein and Mary Shepro of DLA Piper.
In my interviews with judges for this series on sentencing, some of the more interesting insights have come from those who were formerly criminal defense lawyers, says attorney Alan Ellis.