Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
(Podcast) The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
RICO's Person/Enterprise Distinction - RICO Report Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 286: Listen and Learn -- Conclusory Pleadings Under Rule 12(b)(6) (Civ Pro)
Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 208: Listen and Learn -- Motions to Dismiss a Case
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
Second Circuit Decision Potentially Broadens RICO Proximate Cause Element - RICO Report Podcast
Anatomy of a Successful Motion to Dismiss in RICO Case
A Discussion on the Kollaritsch v. Michigan State University Board of Trustees Decision
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
Case Involving Burger King Employee Spitting in Officer’s Burger Goes Before WA Supreme Court
In a decision with important implications for many pending Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) lawsuits, a California Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of a representative PAGA action as untimely because the plaintiff did...more
Baranowski v. City of Newark, Docket No. A-2262-23, NJ Super., App. Div., Mar 11, 2025 - The plaintiff tripped and fell in a pothole in the City of Newark. There were no complaints reported about this pothole prior to this...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that dealt a blow to benefit plan fiduciaries nationwide. The Court unanimously held in Cunningham v. Cornell University that a plaintiff asserting that a plan and...more
Cappel v. Aston Twp. Fire Dep’t, 693 F. Supp. 3d 467 (E.D. Pa. 2023) - During the COVID-19 pandemic, the decedent’s family urgently called 911 as she struggled to breathe and had dangerously low blood-oxygen levels. However,...more
In Briskin v. Shopify, Inc., the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, reversed a district court’s dismissal of a proposed data privacy class action for lack of personal jurisdiction. In applying traditional...more
Maven Advantage, Inc. and Square One Storm Restoration, LLC are competing roofing businesses. Maven alleged that two employees (Couch and Daniels) stole Maven’s trade secrets (customer lists) and then quit to work for Square...more
Eckert v. Hightower, C.A. No. 2024-0569-MTZ (Del. Ch. Mar. 24, 2025) - A board of directors approved compensation packages for the company’s CEO, who also was its controlling stockholder. The CEO was a member of the...more
In Craig v. Target Corporation, et al., the District Court for the Middle District of Florida considered whether Target Corporation (Target) committed securities violations by failing to disclose risks related to an ESG and...more
On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Cunningham v. Cornell University, unanimously holding that a plaintiff can state a valid claim under ERISA by merely alleging that a plan used “plan assets” to pay a service...more
AI, Sci-Fi, and Copyright Collide in Alcon Entertainment LLC v. Tesla Inc. et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-09033, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. In a fascinating twist of sci-fi meets reality,...more
In a unanimous ruling, the New York Court of Appeals held that the New York State Legislature did not alter the substantive pleading requirements of Section 11(b) of the Court of Claims Act (the “Act”) for claims brought...more
Our Industrials & Manufacturing and Products Liability Groups break down how Georgia’s new law alters the tort landscape....more
PAGA claims brought under pre-reform PAGA must be brought within one year of a Labor Code violation experienced by the plaintiff and because a PAGA claim necessarily has both an individual and a non-individual component,...more
The Federal Circuit recently refused to apply collateral estoppel to claims of a patent asserted in district court litigation based on a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision finding similar claims from the same...more
On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Cunningham v. Cornell University that, to state a claim under ERISA section 406(a), plaintiffs need only allege the elements contained in section 406(a). Prior to the Supreme...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion on the requirements for plaintiffs to survive a motion to dismiss regarding an allegation that plan fiduciaries engaged in a prohibited transaction under...more
In fall 2024, plaintiffs filed a wave of putative class action lawsuits against employers challenging wellness programs that impose a health coverage premium surcharge on participants if they do use tobacco or do not complete...more
In Central States, Se. & W. Areas Pension Fund v. Laguna Dairy, S. de R.L. de C.V., No. 23-3206 (3d Cir. 2025 Mar. 27, 2025), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (“Third Circuit”) reversed the district...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Cunningham v Cornell University, addressing the pleading standard applicable to prohibited transaction claims under the Employee Retirement Income...more
In our second edition of MoFo’s quarterly federal securities and Delaware corporate litigation newsletter, we provide a rundown of select developments from the first quarter of 2025. The Ninth Circuit Confirms That...more
In a decision poised to change the landscape of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) litigation, on April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court held in Cunningham et al. v. Cornell University et al. that a claimant...more
On April 1, 2025, United States District Judge Jed S. Rakoff granted Defendants Marut Enterprises LLC and Brett Marut’s (collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss and entered final judgment against Foto Electric Supply...more
In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Cunningham v. Cornell University that plaintiffs can satisfy the requirements for pleading prohibited party-in interest transactions under ERISA section 406(a) without...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion that has the potential to make it more difficult for defendants to have excess fee cases for 401(k) or 403(b) plans dismissed at an early stage of...more
On October 15, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued an opinion in In re Overstock Securities Litigation affirming the District of Utah’s dismissal of putative class action claims under the...more