"No Injury" and "Overbroad" Class Actions After Comcast, Glazer and Butler: Implications for Certification
|
|
- Jonas Walsh
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A "No Injury" and "Overbroad" Class Actions After Comcast, Glazer and Butler: Implications for Certification Navigating Complex Issues of Overbreadth and Damages in Consumer Product Cases TUESDAY, APRIL 1, pm Eastern 12pm Central 11am Mountain 10am Pacific Today s faculty features: Frederick S. Longer, Member, Levin Fishbein Sedran & Berman, Philadelphia Jessica D. Miller, Partner, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, Washington, D.C. Geoffrey M. Wyatt, Counsel, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, Washington, D.C. The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's speakers. Please refer to the instructions ed to registrants for additional information. If you have any questions, please contact Customer Service at ext. 10.
2 FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY Sound Quality If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality of your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet connection. If the sound quality is not satisfactory, you may listen via the phone: dial and enter your PIN when prompted. Otherwise, please send us a chat or sound@straffordpub.com immediately so we can address the problem. If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance. Viewing Quality To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen, press the F11 key again.
3 FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY For CLE purposes, please let us know how many people are listening at your location by completing each of the following steps: In the chat box, type (1) your company name and (2) the number of attendees at your location Click the SEND button beside the box If you have purchased Strafford CLE processing services, you must confirm your participation by completing and submitting an Official Record of Attendance (CLE Form). You may obtain your CLE form by going to the program page and selecting the appropriate form in the PROGRAM MATERIALS box at the top right corner. If you'd like to purchase CLE credit processing, it is available for a fee. For additional information about CLE credit processing, go to our website or call us at ext. 35.
4 FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY If you have not printed the conference materials for this program, please complete the following steps: Click on the ^ symbol next to Conference Materials in the middle of the lefthand column on your screen. Click on the tab labeled Handouts that appears, and there you will see a PDF of the slides for today's program. Double click on the PDF and a separate page will open. Print the slides by clicking on the printer icon.
5 No Injury & Overbroad Class Actions After Comcast, Butler & Glazer: Implications for Certification SPEAKERS: FRED LONGER JESSICA MILLER GEOFFREY WYATT
6 OVERVIEW Significance of Comcast Corp. v. Behrend Glazer & Butler: what they mean for products cases Standing: is it a viable basis to challenge overbroad classes? 6
7 SIGNIFICANCE OF COMCAST Comcast Corp v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct (2013) Class of two million cable subscribers asserted antitrust claims against Comcast Claimed Comcast increased its share of Philadelphia cable market and engaged in anticompetitive conduct Initially had four theories of antitrust impact Court certified one theory Plaintiffs sought to prove classwide damages using an expert opinion that presumed viability of all four theories Court of appeals affirmed certification Supreme Court held that class had to be decertified because the damages and liability theories did not match 7
8 COMCAST NO MISMATCHES Supreme Court majority reversed class certification Plaintiffs did not present classwide damages theory that matched certified liability theory Plaintiffs damages model failed to measure damages resulting from the particular antitrust injury on which [the defendants ] liability [was] premised Thus, questions of individual damages calculations [would] inevitably overwhelm questions common to the class, defeating predominance and rendering classwide treatment improper 8
9 SIGNIFICANCE OF COMCAST Plaintiffs view Certiorari limited to one question: Whether a District Court may certify a class action without resolving whether the plaintiff class has introduced admissible evidence, including expert testimony, to show that the case is susceptible to awarding damages on a classwide basis Dissent: what happened to the question on which certiorari was granted? The Court s ruling is good for this day and case only 9
10 COMCAST NO MISMATCHES First takeaway: classwide liability and damages theories must match Plaintiffs view this conclusion only applies to antitrust cases Harris v. Comscore Inc., 292 F.R.D. 579, 589 n.9 (N.D. Ill. 2013) ( The Supreme Court s holding came from its assumption, uncontested by the parties, that Rule 23(b)(3) requires that damages must be measurable based on a common methodology applicable to the entire class in antitrust cases. That assumption, even assuming it is applicable to privacy class actions in some way, is merely dicta and does not bind this court. ) Defendants view principle is broadly applicable Jacob v. Duane Reade, Inc., 293 F.R.D. 578 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (noting that courts have grappled with Comcast s interaction with nonantitrust class actions and concluding that the no-mismatch rule applies broadly in cases where plaintiffs attempt to rely on purportedly common damages evidence) 10
11 COMCAST NO MISMATCHES Case study: In re Skelaxin Metaxalone Antitrust Litig., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 30, 2014) Putative antitrust class action alleging defendants colluded to delay market entry of generic alternative Plaintiffs sought the difference between the amount they paid and the amount they would have paid for a theorized generic The court denied both the direct and indirect purchasers motions for class certification [I]f Comcast is given its full breadth... the incongruity between End Payors description of class membership and the entities included in its impact and damages model might defeat this proposed class Given Comcast s requirement that the damages model and the theory of liability match, [the expert s damages] model [was] problematic 11
12 COMCAST NO MISMATCHES Case study: Cannon v. BP Prods. N. Am., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (S.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2013) Class action related to defendant s chemical releases and emissions Certification denied plaintiffs could not prove classwide causation or damages Expert s overarching theory of damages could not support plaintiffs certification bid it was disconnected from Plaintiffs causes of action of negligence, trespass, and nuisance which [were] limited to a particular time period beginning in late 2008 One problem: expert advanced a real estate trend analysis that was based on the wrong class area 12
13 COMCAST SCRUTINY OF EXPERTS Second takeaway: Defendants view: courts must rigorously analyze expert evidence at class certification stage It appears certiorari originally granted to resolve the applicability of Daubert at class certification But no Daubert issue was preserved Instead, the Court addressed the merits of the damages evidence under the rigorous analysis requirement It rejected the notion that expert damages evidence need not be scrutinized on the merits; [u]nder that logic,... any method of measurement is acceptable so long as it can be applied classwide, no matter how arbitrary the measurements may be, which would reduce Rule 23(b)(3) s predominance requirement to a nullity 13
14 COMCAST SCRUTINY OF EXPERTS Second takeaway: Plaintiffs view: Merits questions may be considered to the extent but only to the extent that they are relevant to determining whether the Rule 23 prerequisites for class certification are satisfied Amgen v. Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust, 133 S. Ct. 1184, 1195 (2013) 14
15 COMCAST SCRUTINY OF EXPERTS Case study: In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litig., 725 F.3d 244 (D.C. Cir. 2013) It is now indisputably the role of the district court to scrutinize the evidence before granting certification, even when doing so requires inquiry into the merits of the claim It is now clear [ ] that Rule 23 not only authorizes a hard look at the soundness of statistical models that purport to show predominance the rule commands it If the damages model cannot withstand this scrutiny then, that is not just a merits issue No damages model, no predominance, no class certification 15
16 COMCAST SCRUTINY OF EXPERTS Case study: In re Urethane Antitrust Litig., 2013 WL (D. Kan. May 15, 2013) Defendant s motion to decertify class action where the same expert as in Comcast had testified to antitrust impact was rejected There is no basis to strike Dr. McClave s testimony or to conclude that his methodology could not provide a causal link between plaintiffs theory of liability and the class-wide impact 16
17 COMCAST SCRUTINY OF EXPERTS How does this scrutiny relate to Daubert?: Cannon v. BP Prods. N. Am., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (S.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2013) [A] district court s rigorous analysis may necessitate the evaluation of expert testimony. Although courts are not to insist upon a battle of the experts at the certification stage..., [i]n many cases, it makes sense to consider the admissibility of the testimony of an expert proferred to establish one of the Rule 23 elements in the context of a motion to strike prior to considering class certification. The court scrutinized plaintiff s expert s damages opinion [I]n one sense scrutiny of expert testimony being used to show that a case is susceptible to class treatment seems less controversial than the normal application of Daubert, because it does not intrude on the jury s role given that class certification is an issue for the court The expert s overarching theory of damages was disconnected from Plaintiffs causes of action of negligence, trespass, and nuisance which [were] limited to a particular time period beginning in late
18 COMCAST SCRUTINY OF EXPERTS Is it another basis to challenge beyond Daubert? It seems so: In Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation, the D.C. Circuit did not even mention Daubert; instead, it focused on the merits of the damages model See also, e.g., Vaccarino v. Midland Nat l Life Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (C.D. Cal. Feb. 3, 2014) (treating the Comcast inquiry as distinct from a Daubert challenge because it goes to the merits of the evidence) Or not: See In re Skelaxin Metaxalone Antitrust Litig., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 30, 2014) 18
19 COMCAST DAMAGES AT CLASS CERT Third takeaway: damages will play a bigger role at class certification Plaintiffs who attempt to proffer classwide damages evidence will face a higher hurdle Defendants will likely rely increasingly on damages-based arguments in opposition to certification, even outside the mismatch context 19
20 COMCAST DAMAGES AT CLASS CERT Higher hurdle for plaintiffs: Before Behrend, the case law was far more accommodating to class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litig., 725 F.3d 244 (D.C. Cir. 2013) The Court agrees with Defendants that Comcast signals a significant shift in the scrutiny required for class certification. Prior to Comcast, the Court may have been satisfied that Plaintiffs invocation of the event study methodology alone showed the predominance of common issues.... Following Comcast, circuit and district courts have rigorously examined proposed damages methodologies in putative class action cases for disconnects between damages and liability.... Plaintiffs cannot avoid this hard look by refusing to provide the specifics of their proposed methodology. In re BP P.L.C. Secs. Litig., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS , at *73-75 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 6, 2013) 20
21 COMCAST DAMAGES AT CLASS CERT Defendants will raise damages more often, but not always successfully: In re Nexium Esomeprazole Antitrust Litig., 296 F.R.D. 47 (D. Mass. 2013) Putative class action alleging federal antitrust violations Defendants argued damages could not be proven on a classwide basis under Comcast Defendants challenged the methodology of one of plaintiffs experts, who did not account for actual brand prices, but-for generic prices, purchases by brand loyalists, and generic and other-drug conversion rates Defendants argued that [t]hese variations... [were] ignored by the use of averages calculations... and without individualized inquiries, will result in the unlawful recovery of damages by uninjured direct purchasers Court was not persuaded 21
22 COMCAST DAMAGES AT CLASS CERT In re Nexium Esomeprazole Antitrust Litig., 296 F.R.D. 47 (D. Mass. 2013) Court acknowledged that variation in actual price paid among the direct purchasers may preclude some class members from recovery if it is shown that various rebates, discounts, or buying practices did not result in net positive damages However, such variation did not defeat class certification because the plaintiffs advance[d] a single, class-wide theory of harm: Defendants unlawful conduct delayed the entry of lower-priced generic Nexium The court found that this clearly differentiat[ed] th[e] case from the facts in Comcast, which rejected a damages model because it failed solely to incorporate the court s accepted theory of liability 22
23 COMCAST: LIMITED BY GLAZER & BUTLER? Do Glazer and Butler limit application of Comcast with regard to overbroad classes? Whirlpool Corp. v. Glazer, 678 F.3d 409 (6th Cir. 2012) Affirmed class certification of consumers alleging mold in washing machines Most class members 97 percent never complained about any problem with their washers Even if some class members have not been injured by the challenged practice, a class may nevertheless be appropriate Supreme Court vacated and remanded in light of Comcast 23
24 COMCAST: LIMITED BY GLAZER & BUTLER? Do Glazer and Butler limit application of Comcast with regard to overbroad classes? Butler v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 702 F.3d 359 (7th Cir. 2012) Another front-load washing machine class action Predominance is a question of efficiency According to Judge Posner, if Sears thinks the machines are not defective, it can win on classwide basis In tension with Thorogood (not cited in Butler), where Judge Posner rejected a dryer class action because: Consumers may have purchased dryers for reasons unrelated to propensity to cause or prevent rust stains The risks of costly error inherent in allowing one jury to decide liability as to all were too great It appeared that the rust problem did not affect most class members Also vacated and remanded in light of Comcast 24
25 COMCAST: LIMITED BY GLAZER & BUTLER? Do Glazer and Butler limit application of Comcast with regard to overbroad classes? Sixth Circuit stuck to its prior ruling on remand Claimed Glazer was different from Comcast Comcast concerned individualized damages issues Glazer only certified liability for class treatment The defendant argued that injuries were also varied Analogous to Comcast because class members without mold or odor problems were not injured Thus, class device could expand potential recovery beyond any valid liability theory Sixth Circuit sought to avoid injury problem based on premium price theory Supreme Court denied certiorari 25
26 COMCAST: LIMITED BY GLAZER & BUTLER? Do Glazer and Butler limit application of Comcast with regard to overbroad classes? Seventh Circuit followed the same course Comcast does not affect the prior ruling because the case could proceed as an issues class: [t]here is a single, central, common issue of liability: whether the Sears washing machine was defective, that could be resolved on a classwide basis All other, noncommon issues, including both injury and damages, could be resolved separately in individual trials See Butler v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 2013 WL (7th Cir. Aug. 22, 2013) Supreme Court denied certiorari 26
27 IMPACT OF GLAZER & BUTLER Cases limiting Glazer and Butler Ginsburg v. Comcast Cable Communs. Mgmt. LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS , at *5-6 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 24, 2013) (distinguishing Butler because the plaintiffs inability to prove liability on a classwide basis [was] inextricably intertwined with their inability to prove damages ) In re Principal U.S. Prop. Account Erisa Litig., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS , at * (S.D. Iowa Sept. 30, 2013) (distinguishing Glazer because the damages inquiry was so tied to the liability question that individualized analyses permeate[d] th[e] case ) 27
28 IMPACT OF GLAZER & BUTLER Cases following Glazer and Butler Phillips v. Asset Acceptance, LLC, 736 F.3d 1076, 1083 (7th Cir. 2013) (following Butler and reversing class certification after holding that even though actual damages were bound to vary across class members, a class action limited to determining liability on a class-wide basis, with separate hearings to determine if liability is established the damages of individual class members, or homogeneous groups of class members, is permitted by Rule 23(c)(4) ) (quoting Butler) Jacob v. Duane Reade, Inc., 293 F.R.D. 578, (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (following Glazer and maintaining class certification as to liability, but decertifying as to damages in light of the need for individualized proof) 28
29 MORE ISSUES CLASSES? What do Comcast, Butler and Glazer mean for issues classes? The lead dissent in Comcast suggested that individualized damages issues can be addressed through issues classes 133 S. Ct. 1426, 1437 & n.* (2013) The majority did not respond, leaving open the possibility that it intended to require proof of classwide damages in all cases 29
30 MORE ISSUES CLASSES? Courts have gone different ways since Comcast Some have either applied or assumed a requirement of classwide damages and have certified where the plaintiffs provide common evidence of damages and denied certification where they do not Some courts have employ[ed] Rule 23(c)(4) and maintain[ed] class certification as to liability only, leaving damages for a separate, individualized determination Jacob v. Duane Reade Holdings, 293 F.R.D. 578 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (summarizing these approaches) 30
31 MORE ISSUES CLASSES? In re Motor Fuel Temperature Sales Practices Litig., 292 F.R.D. 652 (D. Kan. 2013) Certified issues class on alleged non-disclosure of information regarding gasoline Determining each class members damages, if any, may require individualized determinations, but [t]he possibility that individual issues may predominate the issue of damages... does not defeat class certification by making [the liability] aspect of the case unmanageable Johnson v. Nextel Communs., Inc. 293 F.R.D. 660 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) Certified issues class on employment-discrimination claims Comcast does not apply to certification of liability-only classes and therefore is not relevant to the court s analysis under Rule 23(c)(4) 31
32 MORE ISSUES CLASSES? Defendants Perspective Issues classes pose serious threats for defendants but they are also risky for plaintiffs Issues classes are not fair to defendants Have sometimes been used to relieve plaintiffs from burden of proving injury and causation Issues verdicts can put tremendous pressure on defendant Issues classes are in tension with Seventh Amendment» [T]he risk that a second jury would have to reconsider the liability issues decided by the first jury is too substantial to certify [an] issues class In re ConAgra Peanut Butter Prods. Liab. Litig., 251 F.R.D. 689, (N.D. Ga. 2008) 32
33 MORE ISSUES CLASSES? Plaintiffs Perspective Butler v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 727 F.3d 796 (7th Cir. 2013) Endorses Rule 23(c)(4) issues-oriented class actions Individual damages are not an impediment to class certification If the issues of liability are genuinely common issues, and the damages of individual class members can be readily determined in individual hearings, and settlement negotiations, or by creation of subclasses, the fact that damages are not identical across all class members should not preclude class certification 33
34 MORE ISSUES CLASSES? Plaintiffs Perspective In re: Whirlpool, 722 F. 3d 838 (6th Cir. 2013) Inquiry into the merits of the plaintiffs claims at the class certification stage is limited District Court may not turn the class certification proceedings into a dress rehearsal for trial on the merits The remedy for class members who purchased Duets at a premium price but have not experienced a mold problem can be resolved through the individual determination of damages Endorses Rule 23(c)(4) liability-oriented issues classes Limits Comcast to existing jurisprudence 34
35 MORE ISSUES CLASSES? Plaintiffs Perspective Harris v. Comscore Inc., 292 F.R.D. 579, 589 n.9 (N.D. Ill. 2013) The Supreme Court recently reversed a grant of class certification where [q]uestions of individual damage calculations will inevitably overwhelm questions common to the class The Supreme Court s holding came from its assumption, uncontested by the parties, that Rule 23(b)(3) requires that damages must be measurable based on a common methodology applicable to the entire class in antitrust cases That assumption, even assuming it is applicable to privacy class actions in some way, is merely dicta and does not bind this court» Quoting and citing Ginsburg and Breyer, JJ., dissenting in Comcast ( [T]he decision should not be read to require, as a prerequisite to certification, that damages attributable to a classwide injury be measurable on a class-wide basis ) 35
36 STANDING A VIABLE CHALLENGE? Can defendants use lack of standing to challenge overbroad classes? Defendants perspective: In re Deepwater Horizon, 732 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2013), suggests perhaps so: BP entered class settlement in 2012 agreeing to make payments to cover economic losses arising from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill BP complained that the settlement administrator s methods for evaluating claims allowed uninjured class members to recover Fifth Circuit ordered District Judge Barbier to evaluate legitimacy of claims and cease payments for claims that did not meet stricter standards At least in the Fifth Circuit, classes cannot encompass members who are uninjured and therefore lack legitimate claims not even settlement classes Unless a claimant can colorably assert a loss, it lacks standing 36
37 STANDING A VIABLE CHALLENGE? Can defendants use lack of standing to challenge overbroad classes? Plaintiffs perspective: Subsequent Fifth Circuit decisions vacated the injunction entered in 2013, concluded that class members had standing, and reserved the definition of the proper test for class member standing for another day In re Deepwater Horizon, 739 F.3d 790 (5th Cir. 2014) (affirming district court decision finding standing) In re Deepwater Horizon, 2014 WL (5th Cir. Mar. 3, 2014) (vacating injunction entered in 2013 decision) 37
38 Frederick Longer Levin Fishbein Sedran & Berman Jessica Miller Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom Geoffrey Wyatt Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom 38
Defeating Rule 23(b)(3)'s Predominance Requirement Using Defenses and Counterclaims
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Defeating Rule 23(b)(3)'s Predominance Requirement Using Defenses and Counterclaims Evaluating Effectiveness of Strategy in Light of Differing Lower
More informationArticle III Standing and Rule 23(b)(3) Certification: Emerging Litigation Trends
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Article III Standing and Rule 23(b)(3) Certification: Emerging Litigation Trends Strategies for Plaintiff and Defense Counsel to Pursue or Challenge
More informationRecent Developments In Class Action Litigation: Dukes, Comcast, Glazer and Beyond
Recent Developments In Class Action Litigation: Dukes, Comcast, Glazer and Beyond Presented by John Beisner Beijing Boston Brussels Houston London Los Angeles Palo Alto Paris São Paulo Tokyo Toronto Washington,
More informationthe Amgen and Comcast Decisions Navigating the Issues of Predominance and the Role of the Merits Inquiry at Certification
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A Class Action Certification Following the Amgen and Comcast Decisions Navigating the Issues of Predominance and the Role of the Merits Inquiry at
More informationSummary Judgment Motions: Advanced Strategies for Civil Litigation
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Summary Judgment Motions: Advanced Strategies for Civil Litigation Weighing the Risk of Showing Your Hand, Leveraging Discovery Tools and Timing,
More informationDefeating Liability Waivers in Personal Injury Cases: Substantive and Procedural Strategies
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Defeating Liability Waivers in Personal Injury Cases: Substantive and Procedural Strategies THURSDAY, AUGUST 27, 2015 1pm Eastern 12pm Central 11am
More informationEvidentiary Disclosures in Parallel Criminal and Civil Proceedings
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Evidentiary Disclosures in Parallel Criminal and Civil Proceedings Navigating the Discovery Minefield and Protecting Attorney-Client Privilege WEDNESDAY,
More informationCLASS ACTIONS AFTER COMCAST
CLASS ACTIONS AFTER COMCAST In Comcast, the Supreme Court held that the district court should have considered viability of the plaintiffs damages theory at the class-certification stage Proposed damages
More informationDeposing Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Witnesses
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Deposing Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Witnesses Preparing the Deposition Notice, Questioning the Corporate Representative, Raising and Defending Objections,
More informationDefending Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Depositions in Employment Litigation
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Defending Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Depositions in Employment Litigation Best Practices for Responding to a Deposition Notice, Selecting and Preparing
More informationStatistical Evidence in Wage and Hour Class Actions: Implications of Tyson Foods for Certification and Trial
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Statistical Evidence in Wage and Hour Class Actions: Implications of Tyson Foods for Certification and Trial Disputing or Leveraging Representative
More informationHow To Defend Against Multi-Model Product Class Actions
Westlaw Journal CLASS ACTION Litigation News and Analysis Legislation Regulation Expert Commentary VOLUME 23, ISSUE 12 / JANUARY 2017 EXPERT ANALYSIS How To Defend Against Multi-Model Product Class Actions
More informationDrafting Trademark Settlement Agreements to Resolve IP Disputes
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Drafting Trademark Settlement Agreements to Resolve IP Disputes Negotiating Exhaustion of Infringing Materials, Restrictions on Future Trademark
More informationEnvironmental Obligations in Bankruptcy: Reconciling the Conflicting Goals of Bankruptcy and Environmental Laws
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Environmental Obligations in Bankruptcy: Reconciling the Conflicting Goals of Bankruptcy and Environmental Laws Addressing Pre- vs. Post-Petition
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A E-Signatures and Electronic Loan Documentation in Real Estate Finance: ESIGN and UETA, Interplay With UCC Enforceability, Authentication and Admissibility;
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act: When Do U.S. Antitrust Laws Apply to Foreign Conduct? Navigating the Applicability of the FTAIA's "Effects
More informationPreparing for and Navigating PTAB Appeals Before the Federal Circuit
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Preparing for and Navigating PTAB Appeals Before the Federal Circuit Conducting PTAB Trials With Eye to Appeal, Determining Errors for Appeal, Understanding
More informationInsurance Declaratory Judgment Actions and the Federal Abstention Doctrine: Strategies and Limitations
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Insurance Declaratory Judgment Actions and the Federal Abstention Doctrine: Strategies and Limitations Perspectives From Policyholder and Insurer
More informationChallenging Unfavorable ICANN Objection and Application Decisions
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Challenging Unfavorable ICANN Objection and Application Decisions Leveraging the Appeals Process and Courts to Overcome ICANN Determinations Absent
More informationLeveraging USPTO Technology Evolution Pilot Program
Presenting a live 60-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Leveraging USPTO Technology Evolution Pilot Program Amending Identifications of Goods and Services in Trademark Registration TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15,
More informationHIPAA Compliance During Litigation and Discovery
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A HIPAA Compliance During Litigation and Discovery Safeguarding PHI and Avoiding Violations When Responding to Subpoenas and Discovery Requests THURSDAY,
More informationExtraterritorial Reach of Lanham Act and Protection of IP Rights: Pursuing Foreign Infringers
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Extraterritorial Reach of Lanham Act and Protection of IP Rights: Pursuing Foreign Infringers TUESDAY, APRIL 3, 2018 1pm Eastern 12pm Central 11am
More informationPresenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Td Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A In House Counsel Depositions: Navigating Complex Legal and Ethical Issues Responding to Deposition Notices and Subpoenas and Protecting Privileged
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Drafting Legal Opinions for Article 9 Security Interests: Navigating the Complexities and Avoiding Liability Scope and Limitations, Interests of
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features: Satya Narayan, Attorney, Royse Law Firm, Palo Alto, Calif.
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Drafting Nondisclosure Agreements for Information Technology Transactions Negotiating Key Provisions and Exclusions, Navigating Challenges for Information
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features: Michael A. Brusca, Shareholder, Stark & Stark, Lawrenceville, N.J.
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Personal Injury Opening Statements and Closing Arguments: Preparing and Delivering, Handling Objections and Related Motions Developing and Presenting
More informationSolving the CERCLA Statute of Limitations and Preemption Puzzles
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Solving the CERCLA Statute of Limitations and Preemption Puzzles Lessons From Recent Decisions for Timing in Superfund and Environmental Litigation
More informationHow Wal-Mart v. Dukes Affects Securities-Fraud Class Actions
How Wal-Mart v. Dukes Affects Securities-Fraud Class Actions By Robert H. Bell and Thomas G. Haskins Jr. July 18, 2012 District courts and circuit courts continue to grapple with the full import of the
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Summary Judgment Motions in Wage and Hour Class and Collective Actions: Pre- and Post-Certification Strategies Disposing of or Limiting Claims,
More informationLitigating Employment Discrimination
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A Litigating Employment Discrimination Claims: Filing in State vs. Federal Court Evaluating Substantive and Procedural Advantages and Risks of Each
More informationThe Role of Experts in Class Certification in U.S. Antitrust Cases. Stacey Anne Mahoney Bingham McCutchen LLP
The Role of Experts in Class Certification in U.S. Antitrust Cases Stacey Anne Mahoney Bingham McCutchen LLP In the United States, whether you represent Plaintiffs or Defendants in antitrust class actions,
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Advanced Issues in Bankruptcy Asset Sales: Potential Opportunities and Pitfalls for Buyers Navigating the Complexities of IP Assets, Successor Liability,
More informationNew ERISA Supreme Court Rulings in Conkright and Hardt Leveraging Court Guidance on Deferential Review Standards and Attorney Fee Awards
presents New ERISA Supreme Court Rulings in Conkright and Hardt Leveraging Court Guidance on Deferential Review Standards and Attorney Fee Awards A Live 90-Minute Teleconference/Webinar with Interactive
More informationRendering Third-Party Legal Opinions on LLC Status, Power, Action, Enforceability and Membership Interests
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Rendering Third-Party Legal Opinions on LLC Status, Power, Action, Enforceability and Membership Interests Drafting Defensible Opinions and Minimizing
More informationEffective Discovery Strategies in Class Action Litigation Leveraging Trends and Best Practices for Depositions, Expert Witnesses and E-Discovery
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Effective Discovery Strategies in Class Action Litigation Leveraging Trends and Best Practices for Depositions, Expert Witnesses and E-Discovery
More informationStatistical Evidence in Employment Class Actions After Tyson Foods
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Statistical Evidence in Employment Class Actions After Tyson Foods Disputing or Leveraging Statistical Evidence in Complex Wage and Hour Litigation
More informationTHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION CHASE BARFIELD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 11-cv-04321-NKL SHO-ME POWER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, et al., Defendants.
More informationStrategically Limiting Discovery in Class Litigation: Tactics for Defense Counsel
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Strategically Limiting Discovery in Class Litigation: Tactics for Defense Counsel Leveraging Motions to Stay, Bifurcation Motions and Cost-Shifting
More informationDiscovery Strategies in Wage and Hour Class and Collective Actions Before and After Certification of Putative Class
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Discovery Strategies in Wage and Hour Class and Collective Actions Before and After Certification of Putative Class Strategically Limiting Discovery
More informationState Wage and Hour Class Actions Navigating Procedural and Substantive Challenges in Pursuing or Defending Dual Filed Claims
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A Hybrid FLSA Collective Actions and State Wage and Hour Class Actions Navigating Procedural and Substantive Challenges in Pursuing or Defending Dual
More informationE-Discovery and Spoliation Issues: Litigation Pitfalls, Duty to Preserve, and Claw-Back Agreements
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A E-Discovery and Spoliation Issues: Litigation Pitfalls, Duty to Preserve, and Claw-Back Agreements THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2018 1pm Eastern 12pm
More informationNavigating Section 112 Issues in IPR Proceedings: Using Section 112 as a Sword or a Shield
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Navigating Section 112 Issues in IPR Proceedings: Using Section 112 as a Sword or a Shield Addressing Section 112 Issues in IPR Petitions, Establishing
More informationPatent Licensing: Advanced Tactics
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Patent Licensing: Advanced Tactics for Licensees Post-AIA Structuring Contractual Protections and Responding When Licensed Patents Are Challenged
More informationPresenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Td Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A In Pari Delicto Doctrine in Bankruptcy and Other Asset Recovery Litigation Anticipating or Raising the Defense in Claims Against Directors and Officers,
More informationStrategic Use of Joint Defense Agreements in Litigation: Avoiding Disqualification and Privilege Waivers
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Strategic Use of Joint Defense Agreements in Litigation: Avoiding Disqualification and Privilege Waivers Drafting Agreements That Minimize Risks
More informationLeveraging Daubert Motions in Class Certification: Using or Challenging Expert Testimony Amid Divergent Court Standards
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Leveraging Daubert Motions in Class Certification: Using or Challenging Expert Testimony Amid Divergent Court Standards THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2017
More informationProvisional Patent Applications: Preserving IP Rights in First-to-File System
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Provisional Patent Applications: Preserving IP Rights in First-to-File System Assessing Whether to Use - and Strategies for Leveraging Provisional
More informationDefeating Class Claims by Attacking the Pleadings and Leveraging Other Early Dispositive Motions
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Defeating Class Claims by Attacking the Pleadings and Leveraging Other Early Dispositive Motions TUESDAY, MARCH 29, 2016 1pm Eastern 12pm Central
More informationDaubert Motions in Construction Litigation: Making and Defending Challenges
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Daubert Motions in Construction Litigation: Making and Defending Challenges Navigating Daubert Standards for Expert Witnesses in Design and Construction
More informationPatent Infringement Claims and Opinions of Counsel Leveraging Opinion Letters to Reduce the Risks of Liability and Enhanced Damages
Presenting a 90-Minute Encore Presentation of the Teleconference with Email Q&A Patent Infringement Claims and Opinions of Counsel Leveraging Opinion Letters to Reduce the Risks of Liability and Enhanced
More informationDefending Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Depositions Responding to a Deposition Notice, Selecting and Preparing Witnesses
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Defending Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Depositions Responding to a Deposition Notice, Selecting and Preparing Witnesses THURSDAY, APRIL 18, 2013 1pm
More informationThird-Party Legal Opinions in Corporate Transactions
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Third-Party Legal Opinions in Corporate Transactions Defining Scope, Limitations and Key Terms; Minimizing Liability Risks for Opinion Giver THURSDAY,
More informationSpoliation of Evidence in Personal Injury Claims: Mitigation and Prevention
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Spoliation of Evidence in Personal Injury Claims: Mitigation and Prevention Identifying and Responding to Potential Evidence Spoliation and Drafting
More informationWal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes: The Supreme Court Reins In Expansive Class Actions
July 18, 2011 Practice Group: Mortgage Banking & Consumer Financial Products Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes: The Supreme Court Reins In Expansive Class Actions The United States Supreme Court s decision
More informationMexico's New Anti-Corruption Laws and Implementing Regulations: Private Entities and Individuals in the Crosshairs
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Mexico's New Anti-Corruption Laws and Implementing Regulations: Private Entities and Individuals in the Crosshairs Key Provisions, Ensuring Compliance
More informationTown Of Chester: An Answer On Class-Member Standing?
Portfolio Media. Inc. 111 West 19 th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10011 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Town Of Chester: An Answer On Class-Member
More informationClass Certification in Complex Commercial Litigation
14 Pro Te: Solutio Defeating Class Certification in Complex Commercial Litigation M Most everyone in the business world understands the significance of class certification. If a class is certified, the
More informationPresenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Td Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A Product Liability: Expert Witnesses in Complex and Class Action Litigation Leveraging Experts for Issues of Class Certification, Causation, Manifestation
More informationSocial Media Evidence in Personal Injury Litigation: Admissibility Challenges
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Social Media Evidence in Personal Injury Litigation: Admissibility Challenges Navigating Authentication, Relevance and Hearsay Issues to Keep Out
More informationLeveraging the AIA s Joinder Provision, Recent Decisions, and New Court Procedures in Defending Infringement Disputes
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A NPEs in Patent Litigation: i i Latest Developments Leveraging the AIA s Joinder Provision, Recent Decisions, and New Court Procedures in Defending
More informationExpert Witnesses: Leveraging New Rule 26 Amendments Preserving Work Product Immunity for Expert Opinions and Reports
presents Expert Witnesses: Leveraging New Rule 26 Amendments Preserving Work Product Immunity for Expert Opinions and Reports A Live 60-Minute Teleconference/Webinar with Interactive ti Q&A Today's panel
More informationStandards Related Patents and Standard Setting Organizations Navigating the Challenges of SSOs: Licensing, Disclosure and Litigation
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A Standards Related Patents and Standard Setting Organizations Navigating the Challenges of SSOs: Licensing, Disclosure and Litigation WEDNESDAY,
More informationAppellate Practice: Identifying Issues for Appeal, Drafting Questions Presented, and Briefing the Issues
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Appellate Practice: Identifying Issues for Appeal, Drafting Questions Presented, and Briefing the Issues THURSDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2017 1pm Eastern
More informationNavigating Section 112 Issues in IPR Proceedings: Using Section 112 as a Sword or a Shield
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Navigating Section 112 Issues in IPR Proceedings: Using Section 112 as a Sword or a Shield Addressing Section 112 Issues in IPR Petitions, Establishing
More informationPRP Contribution Claims Under CERCLA Strategies for Cost Recovery Against Other Potentially Responsible Parties
Presenting a 90 Minute Encore Presentation of the Teleconference/Webinar with Live, Interactive Q&A PRP Contribution Claims Under CERCLA Strategies for Cost Recovery Against Other Potentially Responsible
More informationThe Changing Landscape in U.S. Antitrust Class Actions
The Changing Landscape in U.S. Antitrust Class Actions By Dean Hansell 1 and William L. Monts III 2 In 1966, prompted by an amendment to the procedural rules applicable to cases in U.S. federal courts,
More informationComcast Corp. et al. v. Behrend et al. Docket No Argument Date: November 5, 2012 From: The Third Circuit
civil procedure Tightening the Noose on Class Certification Requirements (II): Is Admissible Evidence Required at Class Certification? CASE AT A GLANCE Philadelphia Comcast cable television subscribers
More informationNew Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure: Impact on Chapter 7, 12 and 13 Secured Creditors
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A New Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure: Impact on Chapter 7, 12 and 13 Secured Creditors THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2018 1pm Eastern 12pm Central
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 14-1146 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States TYSON FOODS, INC., v. Petitioner, PEG BOUAPHAKEO, et al., individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated individuals, Respondents. On Petition
More informationpìéêéãé=`çìêí=çñ=íüé=råáíéç=pí~íéë=
Nos. 13-430 and 13-431 IN THE pìéêéãé=`çìêí=çñ=íüé=råáíéç=pí~íéë= SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, v. Petitioner, LARRY BUTLER, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Respondents. WHIRLPOOL
More informationKCC Class Action Digest March 2019
KCC Class Action Digest March 2019 Class Action Services KCC Class Action Services partners with counsel to deliver high-quality, cost-effective notice and settlement administration services. Recognized
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Case No.:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Case No.: 14-80065 ERIC STILLER AND JOSEPH MORO, on behalf of themselves individually and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Petitioners,
More informationThe Need to Establish Absent Class Member Standing in Antitrust Class Actions
theantitrustsource w w w. a n t i t r u s t s o u r c e. c o m O c t o b e r 2 0 1 5 1 The Need to Establish Absent Class Member Standing in Antitrust Class Actions Theane Evangelis and Cynthia E. Richman
More informationPerfecting and Maintaining Article 9 Security Interests
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Perfecting and Maintaining Article 9 Security Interests Avoiding Pitfalls in Perfection and Analyzing the Impact of 2010 UCC Amendments TUESDAY,
More informationNavigating Jurisdictional Determinations Under the Clean Water Act: Impact of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Navigating Jurisdictional Determinations Under the Clean Water Act: Impact of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2016
More informationUnited States District Court
Case:-cv-000-RS Document Filed0// Page of 0 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JESSICA LEE, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals,
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Defending Against Citizen Suits Under Environmental Laws Navigating Notice, Standing, Jurisdiction, Settlements and More Under RCRA, CERCLA, CWA
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 09-8025 PELLA CORPORATION AND PELLA WINDOWS AND DOORS, INC., v. Petitioners, LEONARD E. SALTZMAN, KENT EUBANK, THOMAS RIVA, AND WILLIAM
More informationE-Signatures and Electronic Loan Documentation: Complying with ESIGN/UETA, Interplay With the UCC
Presenting a 90-Minute Encore Presentation of the Webinar with Live, Interactive Q&A E-Signatures and Electronic Loan Documentation: Complying with ESIGN/UETA, Interplay With the UCC Navigating Issues
More informationJONES DAY COMMENTARY
March 2010 JONES DAY COMMENTARY In re Sprint Nextel Corp. : The Seventh Circuit Says No to Hedging in Class Actions The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 ( CAFA ) was perhaps the most favorable legal development
More informationCase 1:05-cv WMN Document 86 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Case 1:05-cv-00949-WMN Document 86 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BRUCE LEVITT : : v. : Civil No. WMN-05-949 : FAX.COM et al. : MEMORANDUM
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case No SCOLA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 11-61357 SCOLA STEPHEN M. MANNO et al., vs. Plaintiffs, HEALTHCARE REVENUE RECOVERY GROUP, LLC, et al., Defendants. / ORDER DENYING MOTION
More informationPRP Contribution Claims Under CERCLA Strategies for Cost Recovery Against Other Potentially Responsible Parties
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A PRP Contribution Claims Under CERCLA Strategies for Cost Recovery Against Other Potentially Responsible Parties TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 1pm
More informationPatent Infringement: Proving Royalty Damages
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Patent Infringement: Proving Royalty Damages Leveraging EMVR, Apportionment, Alternatives to the 25 Percent Rule, and Royalty Stacking THURSDAY,
More informationCase 9:15-cv KAM Document 167 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/19/2017 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 9:15-cv-81386-KAM Document 167 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/19/2017 Page 1 of 10 ALEX JACOBS, Plaintiff, vs. QUICKEN LOANS, INC., a Michigan corporation, Defendant. / UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN
More informationRecent Developments in Class Certification and Decertification After Dukes as the Supreme Court s Composition Changes
327 Recent Developments in Class Certification and Decertification After Dukes as the Supreme Court s Composition Changes Grace E. Speights* & Michael S. Burkhardt** Introduction When the Supreme Court
More informationQui Tam Actions: Guidance for Counsel for Managing Whistleblower Suits
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Qui Tam Actions: Guidance for Counsel for Managing Whistleblower Suits Navigating the False Claims Act, Government Interventions and Plaintiff/Defense
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 12-1716 Gale Halvorson; Shelene Halvorson, Husband and Wife lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellees v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company; Owners
More information2010 Winston & Strawn LLP
Class Action Litigation: The Facts Really Do Matter Brought to you by Winston & Strawn LLP s Litigation Practice Group Today s elunch Presenters Stephen Smerek Litigation Los Angeles SSmerek@winston.com
More informationThird-Party Attorney-Client Privilege Waiver Exceptions: Kovel, Common Interest and Functional Equivalent Doctrines
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Third-Party Attorney-Client Privilege Waiver Exceptions: Kovel, Common Interest and Functional Equivalent Doctrines WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2017
More informationFRCP 45 Third-Party Subpoenas: Using or Objecting to Subpoenas to Obtain Testimony and Evidence
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A FRCP 45 Third-Party Subpoenas: Using or Objecting to Subpoenas to Obtain Testimony and Evidence TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 2017 1pm Eastern 12pm Central
More informationSummary Judgment Motions in Wage and Hour Class and Collective Actions: Pre- and Post-Certification Strategies
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Summary Judgment Motions in Wage and Hour Class and Collective Actions: Pre- and Post-Certification Strategies Leveraging Summary Judgment Motions
More informationFCRA Class Actions in Employment on the Rise: Avoiding and Defending Claims
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A FCRA Class Actions in Employment on the Rise: Avoiding and Defending Claims Drafting Policies and Procedures for FCRA Compliance, Leveraging Class
More informationLaw Amendment and the FCPA Best Practices for Responding to a Chinese Government Commercial Bribery Investigation
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A New Chinese Anti Corruption Law Amendment and the FCPA Best Practices for THURSDAY, AUGUST 25, 2011 1pm Eastern 12pm Central 11am Mountain 10am
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO RWZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-10305-RWZ DAVID ROMULUS, CASSANDRA BEALE, NICHOLAS HARRIS, ASHLEY HILARIO, ROBERT BOURASSA, and ERICA MELLO, on behalf of themselves
More informationPresenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features: Wilson Chu, Partner, McDermott Will & Emery, Dallas
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Negotiating and Navigating the Fraud Exception in Private Company Acquisitions Key Considerations For Drafting a Fraud Exception to an M&A Contractual
More informationCASE NO UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GENE EDWARDS. Plaintiff-Petitioner, FORD MOTOR COMPANY. Defendant-Respondent.
Case: 12-80199 11/21/2012 ID: 8411487 DktEntry: 7 Page: 1 of 10 CASE NO. 12-80199 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GENE EDWARDS Plaintiff-Petitioner, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY Defendant-Respondent.
More informationUCC Articles 8 and 9 and the Hague Securities Convention: Investment Property Update
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A UCC Articles 8 and 9 and the Hague Securities Convention: Investment Property Update Resolving Current Risks Facing Securities Customers, Banks,
More informationLoan Guaranty Enforcement: "Bad Boy," Upstream, Affiliated and Other Agreements
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Loan Guaranty Enforcement: "Bad Boy," Upstream, Affiliated and Other Agreements Best Practices for Lenders and Guarantors In and Outside of Bankruptcy
More informationPleading Standards, Affirmative Defenses and Motions to Dismiss in Federal Court
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Pleading Standards, Affirmative Defenses and Motions to Dismiss in Federal Court Navigating Rule 8 Pleadings, 12(b)(6) and (f) Motions to Dismiss,
More information