Columns & Departments

Discussion of a wrongful death case in which a lawyer was sanctioned for a sexist comment.

Columns & Departments

Discussion of several recent rulings.

Features

The authors review 13 recent cases, dating from 2011 through 2015, that invoked the business judgment rule. The cases discussed show that the all-important <I>Levandusky</I> ruling is still widely applied to give deference to a broad range of board actions.

Features

Lawyers are increasingly expected to understand the implications of cybersecurity when providing advice relating to a long list of matters that include privacy compliance, contract compliance, data breach response, data breach litigation, M&amp;A due diligence, and insurance coverage. As a result, it is important that lawyers understand the latest trends in cyber intrusions that may expose their stakeholders to unwarranted risk and allow adversaries to exploit technical and human vulnerabilities.

Features

One of the most surprising things about the case that Winn-Dixie brought against three national dollar store retailers for alleged violations of Winn-Dixie's exclusive use provisions in more than 100 shopping centers is that Winn-Dixie elected to pursue remedies against the dollar stores rather than the landlords that granted Winn-Dixie an exclusive-use provision with respect to the sale of certain grocery items.

Features

Individual corporate officers of pharmaceutical, medical device, food and related companies can be prosecuted for violations of the United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) under the Park Doctrine. Such prosecutions "tip off" plaintiffs' attorneys to possible areas of product liability litigation to bring against a company.

Features

2016 is in full swing and we will soon be conducting the 2016 Mattern &amp; Associates Cost Recovery Survey. We've been conducting this bi-annual survey since 2004 and, during that time, it has become an industry resource for tracking the cost recovery practices of law firms across size and geography.

Features

n a first-of-its-kind decision, the Eleventh Circuit deferred to the EEOC and held that job applicants may bring "disparate impact" claims for age discrimination against potential employers, even in the absence of evidence of intentional discrimination. The court additionally held that the statute of limitations for filing a charge with the EEOC may be tolled in such cases.