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
(Podcast) 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
On July 24, 2025, Judge Jennifer Murphy of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted a motion to dismiss a putative securities class action brought against a life insurance company (the “Company”) and certain of its...more
Applying Montana state law, the United States District Court for the District of Montana has held that an insurer has no duty to interplead its policy limits to satisfy claims by multiple competing claimants and did not...more
On June 24, 2025, the New Jersey Appellate Division issued an unpublished opinion in Lowe v. Audet, A-4093-23, holding that insurance producers remain exempt from liability under the Consumer Fraud Act (CFA) when performing...more
In recent years, Georgia has earned a prominent—and troubling—spot on the American Tort Reform Association’s annual “Judicial Hellholes” list, drawing national attention to the state’s increasingly unpredictable and...more
Latney v. Fernandez, 2025 WL 457693, No. HHD-CV-23-6168441S (Sup. Ct Hartford, Feb. 6, 2025) - The Superior Court of Connecticut denied a motion for summary judgment to dismiss a claim for uninsured motorist benefits because...more
School Board of Marion County v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 397 So. 3d 248 (Fla. 5th DCA Nov. 21, 2024) - An insurance carrier sought reimbursement for PIP benefits paid following a school bus accident,...more
Recently, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, rejected an insured’s attempt to reframe its claim from a “forces of nature” claim and enforced Section 542A.006 of the Texas...more
In a recent COVID-19 Washington State insurance bad faith case, Tulalip Tribes of Washington v. Lexington Ins. Co., Division I of the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed Washington’s stance holding lost physical use of...more
A recent decision out of the Eastern District of Virginia, Matthews v. Senior Life Ins. Co., provides a helpful reminder that TCPA complaints do not satisfy Rule 8’s pleading standard if they do not plausibly link the...more
Many sponsors and fiduciaries of ERISA retirement plans had been hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Cunningham v. Cornell University (No. 23-1007) would articulate new pleading standards that would slow the...more
Vachon v. The Travelers Home and Marine Insurance Company, Fla. 2d DCA, No. 2d2023-2674, Feb. 14, 2025 - The Second District Court of Appeals considered whether an insurer can raise, as the basis of a motion to dismiss or as...more
The April Friday Five covers cases determining futility of exhausting administrative remedies, the nuances of the pre-existing condition exclusion, ERISA preemption, and genuine issue of material fact over an employee’s...more
Two courts. Two opposite rulings. One critical question: Do plaintiffs have standing to challenge pension risk transfers under ERISA?...more
In Fif Engineering, LLC v. Pacific Employers Ins. Co., No. 24-665, 2025 WL 593384 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 24, 2025), a United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, granted an insurer’s motion to...more
In PMC Casualty Corp. v. Virginia Surety Co., the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, addressed a motion to dismiss a complaint filed by a party to a reinsurance agreement alleging...more
Rodrigues v. Shelbourne Spring, LLC, No. A-39-23 (December 12, 2024) - In a unanimous decision, the New Jersey Supreme Court found Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company had no duty to defend the employer, SIR Electric LLC....more
Apex Roofing & Restoration LLC a/a/o Monica Williams v. United Auto. Ins. Co., Fla. 1st DCA, No. 1D2022-3990, October 2, 2024 - Prior to suit, USAA’s insured assigned her rights to Apex via an Assignment of Benefits (AOB)...more
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, applying Michigan law, granted a primary insurer’s motion to dismiss, determining that a professional liability policy required potential claims to be...more
The insured, Match Group, LLC, brought a coverage action against its insurer, Beazley Underwriting Limited, and obtained a judgment against Beazley that Beazley appealed. In turn, the insured moved to recover the attorney’s...more
Nails v. Amguard Ins. Co., 3:23-cv-557, 2023 WL 5163286 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 10, 2023), adopted, 2023 WL 5351990 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 21, 2023) - An injured plaintiff sued the alleged tortfeasor, the tortfeasor’s employer and the...more
In the ongoing case of Tony v. Evanston Insurance Co., the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida recently issued a ruling denying a motion to dismiss filed by defendant Evanston Insurance Co. in which it...more
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, applying Wisconsin law, denied an insurer’s motion to dismiss on the grounds that the insured dentist’s complaint plausibly alleged that the insurer’s...more
Does the business harm caused by COVID-19 qualify as “direct physical loss” for insurance purposes? In Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. American Home Assurance Company, Index No. 655755/2021, Commercial Division Justice Robert R....more
On February 3, 2023, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri granted MetLife’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim in Collins et al v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. In granting MetLife’s...more
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, applying Kentucky law, has held that an insured v. insured exclusion bars coverage for a lawsuit brought by both insured and non-insured security holders...more