Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
<b><I>Part One of a Two-Part Article</I></b><p>Personal assistants, fitness trackers, and automotive black boxes are among the devices whose data and metadata may have big impact in legal cases. Here's why.
Features
<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
A look at two interesting cases.
Features
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
<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
Investment Firm Can Proceed Against Artist in Litigation Funding Dispute
Columns & Departments
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
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
In-depth analysis of two key rulings.
Columns & Departments
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.