Thought leaders from around the world contribute their perspectives on landmark cases, new legislation, and legal perspectives on new technologies, business practices, and civil procedure.
Lyle D. Larson
Looking at the future of Chevron deference following Kennedy's unexpected departure.
Caroline Helbronner and Sean Maxwell
The case serves as a reminder of the importance of carefully drafting the benefit provisions in supplemental plan texts where members of the underlying registered plan are subject to pension legislation that provides for grow-in benefits on termination of employment.
Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti
Victorian courts have long been reluctant to disrupt the status quo when it comes to appointing expert referees in proceedings. But a recent decision by a Supreme Court of Victoria judge in Construction Engineering could signal a shift in the court’s attitude to appointing expert referees in complex or technical cases.
Jamie L. Graham
Patent law is one more area up for debate with changes coming to the Supreme Court.
News from our listed lawyers. This week: New leadership at Richards, Layton & Finger, and developments in the Supreme Court.
An overview on the ruling of Philips’ EFM+ (DVD) Patent in the Greek Supreme Court.
Gregory Bubalo and Katherine A. Dunnington
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California will significantly impact the plaintiffs’ choices of forums for the filing of mass torts actions.
In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, multiple plaintiffs sued Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. (BMS) in a California state court to recover damages allegedly caused by their use of BMS’ anti-clotting drug, Plavix.
The result of the case is likely to have immediate and significant implications for a large number of property owners and developers in Washington.
Georgia, Alabama, Missouri, and Ohio are among the states fighting to overturn legal abortion in America. With a favorable bench, how might Roe v. Wade look in the future?
Brian J. MacDonough
A new case in Massachusetts clarifies something important about the standards to be met in workplace harassment cases.
Robert M. Steeg
A recent case in the Louisiana Court of Appeal highlights an area of law anyone in real estate needs to know.
Leading cases on the Supreme Court’s 2018 business docket.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wasn’t a member of the U.S. Supreme Court back in 2004, when the justices ruled in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain (124 S.Ct. 2739) that in certain limited circumstances, foreign nationals can use a 1789 law, the Alien Tort Statute, to sue in U.S. courts for violations of the law of nations.
The claimants’ workers’ compensation bar in Pennsylvania scored a significant victory when the state’s high court issued its decision in Protz v. WCAB.
The primary question will likely come down to whether or not cell phone data and location records are protected interests under the Fourth Amendment.
Holly M. Polglase and Matthew E. Bown
The Supreme Court decides the meaning of Article 10(A) of the Hague Service Convention.
Lawsuits about a blood-thinning drug that prevents platelets from clumping together now prevents plaintiffs from joining together to bring state law claims against a corporation when not every plaintiff was harmed in that state.
Robert A. Clifford
Discovery has become more expansive in litigation, despite the fact that the vast majority of civil cases settle before trial.
Clifford J. Zatz and Josh Thomas Foust
The decision “may make it impossible to bring certain mass actions at all.”
Jeff C. Dodd, Tonya Gray, Ben Setnick, John R. Hutchins, Rose Cordero Prey, and Mark A. Chapman
This week, in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, the Supreme Court undid the settled practice of virtually nationwide venue for patent infringement cases.
Alexandra A. Bodnar
The case will now return to the district court to implement the settlement and begin the payout to retired players. More than 100 former players opted out of the class settlement, reserving the right to sue the NFL on their own.
Richard R. Meneghello
Last week’s election of Donald Trump and the expected shift to a more business-friendly U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL) in the new year should resolve any doubt about the future of this rule.
R. Scott Oswald
If a government supplier quietly ignores vital rules but still bills taxpayers as if it had complied, can it be held liable under the federal False Claims Act — even if it never directly lies about its compliance?
Morgan Chu & Rebecca Carson
In every court proceeding, patent litigation included, there will be a winner and a loser. Everyone wants to win, but half lose. Why?