News & Analysis as of

Summary Judgment Statutory Interpretation

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

California appellate court rules font size violation alone sufficient for Rosenthal Act standing

On September 9, a division of the California Courts of Appeal reversed a summary judgment in favor of a debt collector, holding that a violation of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the Rosenthal Act) based on...more

Winstead PC

Court Holds That Residuary Bequest Lapsed And Assets Should Go To The Heir At Law

Winstead PC on

In In re Est. of Edward Long, the primary legal issue concerned the interpretation of a will, specifically whether the residuary clause—which bequeathed the residue of the estate to certain trusts for the decedent’s...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

9th Circuit Clarifies DTSA Trade Secret Disclosure Requirements

The Ninth Circuit recently held that the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) does not require plaintiffs to identify their allegedly misappropriate trade secrets with reasonable particularity at the outset of discovery—much...more

Proskauer - Trade Secrets

9th Circuit Clarifies Trade Secret Disclosure Requirements Under The DTSA

The Ninth Circuit recently held that the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) does not require plaintiffs to identify their allegedly misappropriate trade secrets with reasonable particularity at the outset of discovery—much...more

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

Ninth Circuit Clarifies DTSA’s “Sufficient Particularity” for Identifying Trade Secrets

Trade secret litigation under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) continues to evolve within the Ninth Circuit....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Age Discrimination Act—Which Proscribes Age Discrimination in Programs Receiving Federal Assistance—Does Not Apply to Medical...

The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (the “Age Act”) proscribes age-based discrimination in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance. The Age Act generally does not restrict age discrimination in...more

King & Spalding

Court in Northern District of Texas Finds Elevance Health’s Drop in Ratings Proper

King & Spalding on

On August 18, 2025, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas denied Plaintiff Elevance Health’s (“Elevance”) motion for summary judgment against HHS and CMS. Elevance’s lawsuit alleges that HHS and...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

9th Circuit Ruling Offers Guidance on Timing of Trade Secrets Disclosures in DTSA Cases

On August 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court ruling striking certain trade secrets asserted by a plaintiff on the grounds that the plaintiff had not spelled out its trade...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Scion Hotels vs. Holiday Hospitality: Navigating NJFPA Claims in Franchise Disputes

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Scion Hotels LLC appealed a federal district court’s ruling regarding the non-renewal of a franchise agreement under the New Jersey Franchise Practices Act (NJFPA). The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit’s...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

No specifics, no case? DTSA trade secret disclosure timing differs from CUTSA

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that a district court abused its discretion by striking several of the plaintiff’s trade secrets, concluding that the court improperly relied on Rule 12(f) and failed to...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

The CPSC and Amazon: Navigating a Shifting Regulatory Landscape

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Despite recent leadership and other changes at the agency, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (the “CPSC” or “Commission”) has maintained its focus on regulating e-commerce platforms that facilitate large-volume...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Ninth Circuit Clarifies DTSA’s Trade Secret Identification Requirements

Womble Bond Dickinson on

In an August 12, 2025 decision, the Ninth Circuit emphasized important differences between the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) and the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“CUTSA”)—differences which might...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Trade Secret Plaintiffs Are Not Required to Identify Their Trade Secrets with Particularity Before Beginning Discovery,...

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a recent decision, Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech Inc., No. 23-16093, 2025 WL 2315671 (9th Cir. Aug. 12, 2025), the Ninth Circuit found that a plaintiff bringing claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act...more

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP

The Double-Edged Sword of Chapter 93A, Section 11 in Massachusetts Business Litigation

Introduction - One of the most potent tools in Massachusetts commercial litigation is Chapter 93A, § 11 of the Massachusetts General Laws. Designed to deter “unfair” or “deceptive” conduct in “trade or commerce,” Section...more

Lathrop GPM

Dismissed FTC Commissioner Granted Summary Judgment in Her Challenge to Her Removal Without Cause, but Enforcement of Judgment...

Lathrop GPM on

A federal court in the District of Columbia has recently granted summary judgment to former FTC commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, who is challenging her removal from the FTC by President Trump. Slaughter v. Trump, 2025 WL...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Liquidia Techs., Inc. v. FDA - Updated 5.2.25

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: FDA refused to approve Liquidia’s drug product, Yutrepia because another company, UTC, maintained marketing exclusivity. Liquidia sued FDA, and UTC intervened. The court granted...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

SJC Confines Zoning Standing Analysis To Actual Proposed Use; Speculation As To Future Uses Is Irrelevant

Pierce Atwood LLP on

Last week, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) reversed an Appeals Court panel in a strongly-worded decision concerning abutter standing to appeal a zoning decision, Stone v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Northborough...more

Winstead PC

Court Affirmed An Order Removing A Trustee

Winstead PC on

In Richey v. Brouse, the settlor created a special needs trust for her son, who had a mental disability and a seizure disorder that required day-to-day care. No. 03-23-00544-CV, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 8842 (Tex. App.—Austin...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Supreme Court Invalidates Heightened Evidentiary Standard For Majority-Group Plaintiffs

Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., 605 U.S. ___, 145 S. Ct. 1540 (2025) - Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, alleged under Title VII that she had been denied a management promotion and demoted based on her sexual...more

Carlton Fields

Seventh Circuit Affirms Broad Reading of CGL Policy’s “Radioactive Matter Exclusion” to Include EMF Radiation

Carlton Fields on

On July 9, 2025, in Hammond Power Solutions Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co., the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision granting summary judgment to the insurer and finding, under...more

Maynard Nexsen

Supreme Court Brings Clarity to "Reverse Discrimination" Claims

Maynard Nexsen on

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion holding that Title VII does not impose a heightened or different burden of proof for majority-group plaintiffs. Simply put, “reverse discrimination” Title VII claims...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

The Employee Retention Credit: A court challenge to IRS guidance

Case: Stenson Tamaddon LLC v. IRS, No. CV-24-01123-PHX-SPL, 2025 WL 1725942 (D. Ariz. June 20, 2025) On June 20, 2025, the US District Court for the District of Arizona denied a motion for summary judgment that was filed...more

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

Tax Court Denies SECA Exception to Soroban

The Tax Court recently ruled for the IRS in another case involving the “limited partner exception” under the Self Employment Contributions Act (SECA). Code Section 1402(a)(13) generally exempts the distributive share of...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

U.S. Supreme Court holds district courts are not bound by agency interpretations in civil enforcement proceedings

On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and remanded a lower court decision, holding that the Hobbs Act does not bind district courts in civil enforcement proceedings to an agency’s interpretation of a statute. In this...more

Potomac Law Group, PLLC

SCOTUS Rejects Unique Proof Standards for Reverse Discrimination Plaintiffs

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that courts may not impose heightened evidentiary requirements on Title VII plaintiffs simply because...more

79 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide