Features

Defamation and the Disgruntled Defendant
<b><I>Part One of a Two-Part Article</I></b><p>Analysis of a recent case in which a company, publicly accused by a plaintiff's lawyers of using non-FDA-approved medical devices, fought back by bringing a defamation suit against the opposing attorneys. The decision in the appeal offers some insights into what kinds of allegations may be publicized, and in what circumstances, when a product liability charge is brought.
Columns & Departments
Landlord & Tenant
A look at two interesting cases.
Features

Third-Party Litigation Funding
Third-party litigation funding is a relatively new, but rapidly expanding litigation financing vehicle. According to the authors, general counsel and commercial litigators would be well served to understand the changing landscape regarding the scope and potential uses of such funding.
Features

Trade Secrets Litigation: The No-Longer-Forgotten Part of the Tech IP Arsenal
<b><i>With Massive Jury Rewards and the DTSA Encouraging Federal Litigation, Trade Secrets Litigation Is Seeing a Surge in the Tech Industry</b></i><p>These days, many of the big IP litigation battles involving companies like Facebook, Uber, and Epic, have nothing to do with patents, trademarks or copyrights at all. Instead, it's all about the perhaps forgotten part of IP: trade secrets.
Columns & Departments
Bit Parts
Investment Firm Can Proceed Against Artist in Litigation Funding Dispute
Columns & Departments
In the Courts
A three-judge panel of the Second Circuit upheld the conviction of Mathew Martoma for insider trading and, in doing so, overruled part of <I>United States v. Newman</I>, thereby removing one obstacle for prosecutions of insider trading.
Columns & Departments
Development
A look at a case in which, in a developer's article 78 proceeding challenging the town's denial of its application to rezone property, the town moved to dismiss.
Columns & Departments
Verdicts
In-depth analysis of two key rulings.
Columns & Departments
Case Notes
A look at a situation in which, because the drug-manufacturing defendants seeking federal retention of a case removed from state court were unable to prove the four elements of the U.S. Supreme Court's <I>Gunn</I> test for federal-question jurisdiction, the case was remanded back to state court.
Columns & Departments
Cooperatives & Condominiums
Discussion of two major cases.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent TrollsWith trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.Read More ›
- Risks of “Baseball Arbitration” in Resolving Real Estate Disputes“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.Read More ›
- Private Equity Valuation: A Significant DecisionInsiders (and others) in the private equity business are accustomed to seeing a good deal of discussion ' academic and trade ' on the question of the appropriate methods of valuing private equity positions and securities which are otherwise illiquid. An interesting recent decision in the Southern District has been brought to our attention. The case is <i>In Re Allied Capital Corp.</i>, CCH Fed. SEC L. Rep. 92411 (US DC, S.D.N.Y., Apr. 25, 2003). Judge Lynch's decision is well written, the Judge reviewing a motion to dismiss by a business development company, Allied Capital, against a strike suit claiming that Allied's method of valuing its portfolio failed adequately to account for i) conditions at the companies themselves and ii) market conditions. The complaint appears to be, as is often the case, slap dash, content to point out that Allied revalued some of its positions, marking them down for a variety of reasons, and the stock price went down - all this, in the view of plaintiff's counsel, amounting to violations of Rule 10b-5.Read More ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.Read More ›
- The DOJ Goes Phishing: The Rise of False Claims Act Cybersecurity LitigationWhile the DOJ Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative is still in its early stages and cybersecurity regulations are evolving, whistleblower plaintiffs have already begun leveraging the FCA to pursue alleged noncompliance with government cybersecurity requirements.Read More ›