Up until now, before a purported "purchaser" may join a class action targeting a product, the potential class member must make a showing that (s)he actually purchased the product and was potentially damaged by the alleged wrong. A recent Seventh Circuit decision, however, provides a decisive counterpoint to decisions in the Third and Eleventh Circuits.
Many companies that have had disputes with developers have been surprised to discover that the agreements signed, often without input from legal, failed to hold developers to measurable standards, give the company ongoing interest in deliverables, or provide meaningful remedies to problems that arise.
A hornbook principle of U.S. bankruptcy jurisprudence is that valid liens pass through bankruptcy unaffected. This longstanding tenet, however, is at odds with section 1141(c) of the Bankruptcy Code, which provides that, under certain circumstances, "the property dealt with by [a Chapter 11] plan is free and clear of all claims and interests of creditors," except as otherwise provided in the plan or the order confirming the plan.
Last month, the authors began discussion of a trend in New Jersey case law that has been moving that state toward the expansion of hospital liability through the continuous erosion of the statutorily imposed $250,000 charitable immunity cap. They continue their analysis of this trend and its consequences herein.
The issue of damages remains a hot topic at the Federal Circuit, with patentees being continuously reminded that damages must be apportioned to account for the value of patented features, as opposed to unpatented features, of an accused product. However, the vast majority of these cases involve apportionment in the context of reasonable royalties. Very little has been said about apportionment in a lost profits analysis.
Coverage disputes stemming from the flood of lawsuits brought by the FDIC against directors and officers of failed banks are far from over. The most heavily litigated issue is whether a lawsuit commenced by the FDIC as a receiver of a failed bank is precluded by the "insured v. insured" exclusion commonly contained in Directors and Officers liability ("D&O") policies.
Most lawyers have heard of the "Internet of Things." Business leaders, after all, are busy making the Internet of Things (IoT) the next great wave of innovation to sweep across the global economy. Apple, AT&T, Cisco, General Electric, Google, Honeywell, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle, Panasonic, Samsung, and scores of others have been investing in the IoT for years. With current predictions of a $15 trillion IoT market in fewer than 10 years, it is easy to understand why so many industry giants have made the IoT a strategic priority.
Whether a policy's anti-assignment clause will void a transfer of insurance proceeds or coverage rights, by contract or operation of law, usually requires an analysis of whether the predecessor corporation is an insured under the policy; whether the predecessor corporation still exists; whether the successor corporation succeeded to the predecessor's liabilities; and more.
While some trade on the "black market" or though in-person settings has always existed, the Internet has become the major facilitator of the trade in counterfeit goods. This is because it allows counterfeiters to directly reach consumers instead of having to work through complicit retail middlemen. The counterfeiters often work from countries where brands have limited ability to enforce their trademarks.
Exploiting the full potential of the technology your firm has chosen to purchase is a challenge ' adoption and utilization are distinctly separate actions. How can your firm ensure the best chance for utilization?
