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.
On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it would not entertain arguments in GG v. Gloucester County School Board, a case that would have been the Court’s first significant opportunity to weigh in on gender identity issues.
When do you create a new service line?
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.
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?
Is it a good deal and a safe opportunity for investors?
Robert A. Clifford
Discovery has become more expansive in litigation, despite the fact that the vast majority of civil cases settle before trial.
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.
Brian J. MacDonough
A new case in Massachusetts clarifies something important about the standards to be met in workplace harassment cases.
Jamie L. Graham
Patent law is one more area up for debate with changes coming to the Supreme Court.
The claimants’ workers’ compensation bar in Pennsylvania scored a significant victory when the state’s high court issued its decision in Protz v. WCAB.
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.
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.
Michael B. Fein
If the European Parliament and the 25 participating states were trying to emulate a U.S. patent and replace the present Balkanized system wherein each state has its own patent granting authority and courts handling patent litigation, it has failed miserably.
It’s not just a matter of experience—often you need to look deeper than what's on the resume.
The primary question will likely come down to whether or not cell phone data and location records are protected interests under the Fourth Amendment.
In these post-conviction cases, we look for Constitutional violations that deprived the defendant of a fair trial and undermined confidence in the outcome.
The result of the case is likely to have immediate and significant implications for a large number of property owners and developers in Washington.
News from our listed lawyers. This week: New leadership at Richards, Layton & Finger, and developments in the Supreme Court.
Lyle D. Larson
Looking at the future of Chevron deference following Kennedy's unexpected departure.
An overview on the ruling of Philips’ EFM+ (DVD) Patent in the Greek Supreme Court.
Legalist launched a two-week campaign to help consumers sue Equifax—in small claims court.
Holly M. Polglase and Matthew E. Bown
The Supreme Court decides the meaning of Article 10(A) of the Hague Service Convention.
Patricia H. Thompson
Very simply, delay in dispute resolution is bad for business.
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.
Julie Desrosiers and Michael Shortt
The nine judges of the Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the so-called “promise doctrine” was not part of Canadian patent law, and laid out a new approach to the utility requirement which substantially lowers the bar to proving usefulness of patented inventions.