Lawyers for GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) were enjoying something of a winning streak in their efforts to remove drug product liability lawsuits to federal court ' and keep them there ' by arguing that it has converted to a limited liability company that is based in Delaware. But that streak may now be over.
- July 26, 2011Shannon P. Duffy
An in-depth review of recent litigation that affects this practice area.
July 26, 2011David R. Geiger and Creighton K. PageThe heightened pleading requirements of Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly require that practitioners who plan to file a complaint in a medical device case be even more cautious than usual. Otherwise, they may be subject to a dismissal on the pleadings.
July 26, 2011Larry GoldhirschThis article focuses on the potential for extraterritorial application of the expanded Sarbanes-Oxley provisions and the new SEC whistleblower cause of action.
July 25, 2011Jason C. Schwartz, Thomas M. Johnson, Jr., and Amanda PenabadRetail tenants in California ' and perhaps those in other states as well ' that collect ZIP Codes may very well find themselves the subject of putative class actions, the penalties for which could be substantial.
July 25, 2011John PowersWith foreclosure filings at unprecedented levels, associations are facing high assessment delinquency rates since generally when a homeowner stops paying his or her mortgage, he or she also ceases paying any assessments. A look at recent litigation.
July 24, 2011Ronald B. Cohn and Taylor SamsingThe Supreme Court's 5-to-4 decision in Stern v. Marshall definitively upsets a quarter-century's jurisdiction by bankruptcy courts over a large set of actions.
July 24, 2011William M. HawkinsThere can be significant economic efficiencies realized by moving to the cloud. However there are also potential risks involved if an entity does not adequately consider the information governance implications, especially those involving electronic discovery.
June 30, 2011Bennett B. Borden and Shannon SmithThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently reconfirmed the long-established principle that, under California law, an implied-in-fact contract claim over an alleged promise to pay for use of an idea or concept isn't preempted by federal copyright law.
June 30, 2011Stan Soocher

