Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
RICO's Person/Enterprise Distinction - RICO Report Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 286: Listen and Learn -- Conclusory Pleadings Under Rule 12(b)(6) (Civ Pro)
Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 208: Listen and Learn -- Motions to Dismiss a Case
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
Second Circuit Decision Potentially Broadens RICO Proximate Cause Element - RICO Report Podcast
Anatomy of a Successful Motion to Dismiss in RICO Case
A Discussion on the Kollaritsch v. Michigan State University Board of Trustees Decision
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
Case Involving Burger King Employee Spitting in Officer’s Burger Goes Before WA Supreme Court
Comer v. American Transmission Systems, Inc., Civil Action No. 23-1464, 2025 WL 1530750 (W.D. Pa. May 29, 2025) - Carlos Melendez was working on a “transmission tower painting crew” for one of several named defendants when he...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on April 8, 2025, clarified the scope of “marital status” discrimination under the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). In Hunter v. Debmar-Mercury LLC, et al., the Second...more
Last month, Judge Jose E. Martinez of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida denied the Burger King Defendants’ (“Burger King”) motion to dismiss a putative class action alleging that its “No-Hire”...more
The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico recently issued an important decision limiting the role of Puerto Rico’s courts in labor complaints that involve conduct governed by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). In Rodríguez...more
Takeaway: We have written about “no-poach” class actions, in which employers allegedly conspire not to recruit or hire each other’s employees with the intent of driving down wages. See Eleventh Circuit reinstates no-hire...more
Do former employees have the right to sue their previous employer under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for discrimination in the administration of post-employment fringe benefits? Resolving a circuit...more
On March 25, 2025, in Smith v. Coupang,[1] the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington denied Coupang, Inc.’s motion to dismiss its former employee’s SOX and state law whistleblower claims despite...more
This third installment of the 10 Compelling Reasons for Employment Arbitration explores the impact of an arbitration agreement on a plaintiff’s litigation strategy. As discussed herein, arbitration programs can tamp down a...more
Arrington v. Burger King Worldwide, Inc., No. 1:18-cv-24128 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 5, 2018) – In October 2018, Jarvis Arrington, a former employee at a Burger King franchisee in Illinois, filed a class action complaint against...more
On June 2, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the appeal of a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision interpreting the limitations period for filing lawsuits under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. ...more
Did you receive a complaint alleging that your company’s website violates New York’s equivalent of the Americans with Disabilities Act? Does the complaint allege the website violates New York State Human Rights Law and New...more
Wolfspeed, a Durham-based silicon carbide semiconductor business, has plenty on its plate these days amid media reports of an impending bankruptcy reorganization. While such a filing would be aimed at a short(ish) judicial...more
The Puerto Rico Supreme Court has reaffirmed that Puerto Rico courts lack subject-matter jurisdiction over employment claims that arguably involve unfair labor practices covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). ...more
In North American Fire Ultimate Holdings, LP v. Alan Doorly, the Delaware Court of Chancery held that the restrictive covenants included in an incentive unit grant agreement were unenforceable when the units received by the...more
On May 9, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit published a significant decision in Scharpf v. General Dynamics Corp., reviving a dormant class action lawsuit against a group of the country’s largest naval...more
Makins v. Palace Rehab & Care Ctr. and Premier Cadbury, LLC, No. A-2263-23 & A-2276-23 (April 24, 2025) - The petitioner’s legal dispute arose from a series of workers’ compensation claims related to injuries sustained during...more
Second Circuit holds employees get disability accommodations even if not necessary to perform their job - In Tudor v. Whitehall Central School District, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a lower court’s grant of...more
Contractual limitations periods provide parties on both sides of an agreement certainty regarding the filing of a potential action. But many employers do not know that they may include such contractual limitations periods in...more
In a decision with important implications for many pending Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) lawsuits, a California Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of a representative PAGA action as untimely because the plaintiff did...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
PAGA claims brought under pre-reform PAGA must be brought within one year of a Labor Code violation experienced by the plaintiff and because a PAGA claim necessarily has both an individual and a non-individual component,...more
On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Cunningham v. Cornell University that, to state a claim under ERISA section 406(a), plaintiffs need only allege the elements contained in section 406(a). Prior to the Supreme...more
In fall 2024, plaintiffs filed a wave of putative class action lawsuits against employers challenging wellness programs that impose a health coverage premium surcharge on participants if they do use tobacco or do not complete...more
In a decision poised to change the landscape of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) litigation, on April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court held in Cunningham et al. v. Cornell University et al. that a claimant...more
On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007, holding that a plaintiff may state a prohibited-transaction claim in violation of ERISA § 406(a) without referencing the exemptions...more