Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 497: Listen and Learn -- Incidental, Reliance, and Restitution Damages (Contracts)
Ways Organizations Can Pursue Legal Collections
OK at Work: Navigating Customer Terms and Usage
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 295: Listen and Learn -- Incidental, Reliance, and Restitution Damages (Contracts)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 274: Listen and Learn -- UCC Expectation Damages (Contracts)
Viaje al Pasado Legal: Una Reclamación en Piedra
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 213: Listen and Learn -- Material Breach vs. Minor Breach (Contracts)
Law Brief®: Rich Schoenstein and Robert Heim Discuss Musk v. Twitter
4 Key Takeaways | The Future of Construction, Infrastructure and Energy Disputes in the Endemic Age
It’s Lit? Insight into the Increase in Cannabis-Related Litigation in California
Is There Liability for Terminating Contracts Related to Russia?
Basics of a Healthcare Contract: When Do You Actually Have One and What Happens if It's Breached?
Beyond Regulations: Hospice Business Contracts and Contract Disputes
Podcast - The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Say NFT Again – I Dare You: Miramax Sues Quentin Tarantino Over Plans to Sell “Pulp Fiction” NFT
The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Say NFT Again – I Dare You: Miramax Sues Quentin Tarantino Over Plans to Sell “Pulp Fiction” NFT
Monthly Minute | Global Supply Chain Issues
Protect Your Construction Project: Top 10 Insurance Provisions to Know
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 119: Listen and Learn -- Anticipatory Repudiation (Contracts)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 95: Listen and Learn -- Promissory Estoppel
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 93: Listen and Learn -- Constructive Eviction
In a digital age where large volumes of data can be transferred and retained with ease, the Singapore High Court’s recent decision in Hayate Partners Pte Ltd v Rajan Sunil Kumar [2025] SGHC 41 sheds light on a growing...more
A federal court in Massachusetts recently granted, in part, a Motion for Preliminary Injunction as to enforcement of franchise agreement noncompete covenants but denied the motion as to claims of trademark infringement,...more
Maven Advantage, Inc. and Square One Storm Restoration, LLC are competing roofing businesses. Maven alleged that two employees (Couch and Daniels) stole Maven’s trade secrets (customer lists) and then quit to work for Square...more
Imagine getting your hands on the ultimate creator cheat code — the behind-the-scenes playbook MrBeast uses to dominate YouTube. Now imagine going viral not for using it, but for allegedly walking off with it. That’s exactly...more
On March 27, 2025, in Stimlabs LLC v. Griffiths, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ordered a former executive, Sarah Griffiths, to face claims related to her alleged theft of Stimlab’s trade secrets...more
Piracy is defined as robbery by ship- or boat-borne attackers upon another ship or a coastal area, with a goal of stealing cargo or other valuables. During the Golden Age of Piracy, from the 1680s to the 1720s, infamous...more
Ex-employee’s golf outing with customer does not violate non-solicit - An auto parts manufacturer in Michigan sought a preliminary injunction against a former sales employee for violating his restrictive covenants,...more
California’s statutory ban on post-employment covenants, which are enforceable in most other states, has bedeviled employers trying to protect confidential information and trade secrets. The state’s Business and Professions...more
Melody Shan was employed by Sabre GLBL. Shan entered into an employment agreement with Sabre, which prohibited Shan from disclosing confidential information and competing with Sabre for its employees, contractors, and...more
What happens when your employee signs multiple restrictive covenant agreements with different terms, and then violates them? A recent decision from the Third Circuit in Heartland Payment Sys., LLC v. Volrath addresses a...more
Last month, California’s Fourth District Court of Appeal issued AMN Healthcare, Inc. v. Aya Healthcare Servs., Inc., 28 Cal. App. 5th 923 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018), a decision calling into question the validity of non-solicitation...more