The Second Circuit's recent decision in <i>Rescuecom Corp. v. Google, Inc.</i> is but one more step in a long-standing battle that's likely to continue for some time; it's been five years already, and the court merely ruled on a technicality that allows the case to run longer still. Most Google users and advertisers are blissfully unaware of what's going on, and even many involved in Internet commerce don't understand the implications.
Internet gambling proponents suffered a major setback when a federal appeals court refused to strike down a 2006 law in which Congress banned all Internet gambling transactions that would be illegal in the gambler's state.
The New York Supreme Court, New York County, denied a motion to dismiss a complaint by a personal manager who seeks unpaid commissions from artists he managed.
The Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, affirmed a quantum meruit award based on contract-negotiation representation that attorney Todd Musburger provided to talk show personality Gary Meier.
Although alien tort claims are still relatively novel, long-standing principles of insurance law, and judicial precedents established based on more familiar fact patterns, should provide helpful guidance to companies facing these claims.
This article discusses the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in <i>Rodriguez v. West Publishing Co.</i>, 563 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2009), that specifically considered the viability of incentive awards and their impact on the adequacy of class representatives.
The first part of this article about the Supreme Court's ruling <i>Ricci v. De Stefano</i> discussed what statisticians really have to say about disparate impact. The conclusion herein addresses the results of, and lessons to be learned from, the <i>Ricci</i> case.
“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.
Insiders (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.
The 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.
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.
With 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.
