Judge Xavier Rodriguez on Possession, Custody, or Control from the Meet and Confer Podcast
Key Discovery Points: ESI Protocol Objection Denial Party
eDiscovery Case Law Podcast: How Failing to Meet and Confer Effectively Can Lead to Sanctions
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 305: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 2 – Discovery)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 286: Listen and Learn -- Conclusory Pleadings Under Rule 12(b)(6) (Civ Pro)
Direct Examination: To Lead or Not to Lead
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 416: Listen and Learn -- Service of Process (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 224: Listen and Learn -- Service of Process (Civ Pro)
The Only Rule of Multidistrict Litigation Is...
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 208: Listen and Learn -- Motions to Dismiss a Case
Practicing Before the U.S. Supreme Court | Kannon Shanmugam | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Podcast - Finding the Balance
Amended Rules Five Months Later: Early Trends in Case Law and What It Means
Proposed FRCP Changes: Effect on eDiscovery, RIM & IG (CLE)
In this alleged wrongful termination and retaliation case, a “whistleblower” complaint was dismissed and monetary sanctions were also imposed. Pable v. Chicago Transit Authority, __ F. 4th __, 2025 WL 2102202 (7th Cir. Jul....more
Last week’s Privilege Point described the Missouri Supreme Court’s understandable conclusion that a railroad employee did not have a personal attorney-client relationship with railroad lawyers who interviewed her about an...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld a permanent injunction, concluding that the district court properly determined that a party’s violation of a settlement agreement would lead to irreparable harm. Wudi...more
On July 22, 2025, the Virginia Court of Appeals issued a published order in Sisco v. Holtzman, Rec. No. 024025, clarifying the rules for assignments of error in appellate proceedings. Assignments matter. The Court of Appeals...more
On July 9, 2025, Judge J. Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y) found that collateral estoppel barred plaintiff Linfo IP, LLC from relitigating the validity of its asserted patent and dismissed Linfo’s infringement claims against Aero...more
Labcorp v. Davis brought a pivotal question to the fore: Can a court certify a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) that includes uninjured members? The case had the potential to significantly affect forum...more
The Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two (Riverside) in RND Contractors, Inc. v. Superior Court (2025) issued a significant published decision. The California Court of Appeal addressed a previously...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision Cunningham v. Cornell University, 145 S.Ct. 1020 (2025) significantly lowers the pleading standard for prohibited transaction claims under Section 406(a) of the Employee Retirement...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in a full en banc decision, raised the pleading and proof standards for plaintiffs seeking to certify multistate automotive defect class actions. The court’s June 27, 2025,...more
On June 16, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) vacated a $300 million damages award because the district court used a flawed verdict form, which included only a single, blanket question as to...more
The Fourth Circuit (again) de-certified classes in the Marriott Data Breach Litigation. As further described below, the court held that the class action waiver at issue in the case was valid, not prohibited by Rule 23, and...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed as improvidently granted the writ of certiorari in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Luke Davis, No. 22-55873, which raised whether a federal court may certify a...more
Whether you're the appellant or the appellee, knowing when an argument is properly preserved goes a long way. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit publishes very few opinions, so finding a roadmap for...more
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Labcorp v. Davis (No. 24-304), a case that arrived at the Court to resolve a fundamental question: "[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded a district court decision, allowing collection of actual damages in a default judgment where the complaint only sought damages “in an amount to be determined...more
A few months ago, we wrote about the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to grant review in Labcorp v. Davis. As we noted at the time, Labcorp raises a long-debated question of class-action law: Can a federal court certify a...more
In its recent decision in Pets Gifts USA v. Imagine This Company, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit emphasized that while parties may wish to file an appeal, their desires are always subject to the strict...more
A Georgia appellate court recently affirmed the grant of class certification in favor of a class of Georgia individuals whose vehicles were booted in locations where no ordinance had been enacted authorizing the booting of...more
Citing forfeiture, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the dismissal of a complaint against the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO). The complaint sought director review of a 2018 Patent Trial & Appeal Board...more
The Federal Circuit rarely decides cases en banc. For example, in 2024, the Court only heard one en banc case. Stunningly, on September 25, 2024, the Federal Circuit granted Google’s petition for rehearing en banc in the case...more
On January 24, 2024, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Laboratory Corp. of America v. Davis (“LabCorp”),[1] to consider “[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure...more
On January 24, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Laboratory Corp. of America v. Davis, No. 24-0304, which may result in the resolution of a long-standing circuit split on a dispute key to class certification. In...more
February 11, 2025 Types : Alerts Meta Platforms, Inc. recently defeated certification of a class of consumers who claim the company lied about its user privacy safeguards and violated antitrust laws. ...more
Ever had to explain to a client why a sweet win in the lower courts doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s time to dig in and eat? In City of Martinsville, VA v. Express Scripts, a Fourth Circuit majority opinion used a...more
Snap removal is a rare but useful procedural device to remove an action from state to federal court under the diversity jurisdiction rules, even when the plaintiff’s complaint names an in-state defendant as a party....more