Features
Lewis E. Hassett
&
and Brian J. Levy
The Supreme Court of Georgia recently held in <i>Trinity Outdoor, LLC v. Central Mut. Ins. Co.</i> that an insured for which the insurer is providing a defense does not have a claim for an alleged bad faith failure to settle prior to the entry of an excess judgment.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Features
Patricia Anderson Pryor
The <i>Ricci</i> decision is a reminder for all employers: Employment decisions cannot be made based on race, regardless of whatever good intentions the employer may have. Even though the Court confirmed that employers can take "affirmative efforts to ensure that all groups have a fair opportunity to apply for promotions and to participate in the process by which promotions will be made," the actual decisions cannot be tainted by racial consideration.
Features
Dennis R. Kiker
In-house counsel and their outside counterparts routinely struggle with the problem of when and how to issue legal hold notices. When is litigation reasonably anticipated? Who should get the notice? Should the notice be tailored to the case or based on a rigid template? One question that should have a consistent answer is whether the notice should be in writing.
Features
Robert S. Reder
&
Matthew A. Thiel
Complex and systemic, the current financial crisis is nearly certain to yield extensive legislation regulating everything from the financial markets to mortgage brokers to ratings agencies. Any such legislation may raise interpretive issues similar to those that have arisen in recent Federal Court decisions interpreting section 304 and section 1514A(a)(1) of the sweeping Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("SOX").
Features
Richard Raysman
&
Peter Brown
Private companies with external Web sites can be susceptible to attackers looking to commit defacement or infiltrate computer networks to steal sensitive information. Here's what you need to know.
Features
Sheri Qualters
A recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision reversing the U.S. Court of Federal Claims' denial of a vaccine injury claim highlights the widening gulf between the Federal Circuit and Federal Claims court on vaccine cases.
Features
Mark Faas
'Courts will not set aside an agreement on the ground of unconscionability simply because it might have been improvident,'" a panel recently held in <i>Etzion v. Etzion</i>, 2008-00759.
Features
J. Christopher Allen, Jr.
The two recent Supreme Court decisions in <i>Riegel</i> and <i>Altria Group</i> are difficult to reconcile in fundamental ways, and, consequently, they did little to provide meaningful guidance to litigants and lower courts.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
