Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In multidistrict litigation ('MDL') proceedings involving product liability claims, the choice of what law to apply continues to be a thorny issue. For instance, in In re Ephedra Products Liability Litigation, No. 04-1598 (S.D.N.Y) (the 'Ephedra MDL'), Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the Southern District of New York raised the question of whether the Restatement of the Law Third of Torts could be applied as the universal law applicable to all claims in the proceeding. See Case Management Order ('CMO') No. 4 at '11, July 9, 2004. Judge Rakoff later concluded, at the Sept. 10, 2004 Status Conference, that application of such a 'universal law' would be inappropriate. Such choice-of-law issues, however, remain problematic. That is so not only with regard to substantive law, but with regard to procedural law as well.
Indeed, Judge Rakoff recently referred to 'controlling' Eighth Circuit law when deciding a question of whether a case that had been filed in Missouri state court could acquire diversity jurisdiction by the involuntary dismissal of a non-diverse defendant. See CMO No. 20 at '9, Dec. 23, 2005. The Eighth Circuit has a strict rule that the involuntary dismissal of a non-diverse party does not make a case eligible for removal. See In re Iowa Mfg. Co., 747 F.2d 462 (8th Cir. 1984) (per curiam) (citing Whitcomb v. Smithson, 175 U.S. 645, 638 (1900)). The reason for the rule is to contribute to judicial economy, 'because after an involuntary removal, the plaintiff may appeal the dismissal in state court, and success on appeal would lead to the reinstatement of the non-diverse party, destroying federal jurisdiction and compelling remand to the state court.' Pender v. Bell Asbestos Mines, Ltd., 46 F. Supp. 2d 937, 940-941 (E.D. Mo. 1999) ('Pender I'). Under this 'involuntary dismissal' rule, only when a plaintiff can be said to have voluntarily dismissed a non-diverse defendant can a case be removed appropriately on diversity jurisdiction grounds. Id.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.