4,296 results found

Business owners often overlook critical contract provisions until disputes reach the courtroom, where the cost of litigating vague or missing terms far exceeds what proper drafting would have cost initially. This analysis examines five essential contract provisions that prove most valuable during litigation, from attorney's fee recovery to integration clauses, offering practical guidance on drafting these terms to minimize disputes and protect business interests under Arizona law.

On December 16, 2014, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court of Arizona’s dismissal of a Section 10(b) class action against Apollo Education Group, Inc. and several of its officers and directors.

The long-established "Business Judgment Rule" serves as a safeguard for directors and officers against liability stemming from decisions made in their corporate capacities.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in the course of applying the dictionary driven plain meaning rule, revealed internal disagreement on the proper application of dictionary definitions to claim construction when the dictionary provides competing meanings.

Generally, the Supreme Court held in Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976) that a Mirandized defendant who elects to remain silent in the face of questioning cannot have that silence used against him at trial, either on the prosecution’s case in chief or via impeachment or rebuttal.

While much of the jurisprudence addressing the admissibility of out-of-court statements in criminal cases turns on abstract notions of the meaning of the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause (see a recent example here), defense counsel can sometimes block or successfully appeal the admission of testimony simply because the applicable rules of evidence bar its admission, without reaching questions of constitutional import.

The court’s sentence in the Texas "affluenza" case was irrationally disproportionate.

A recent research article looked at how lawyers in court questioned children about timing issues. Prior research has shown that children, particularly young children...

A federal court in Florida dismissed a qui tam action against medical device company Theken Companies, ruling that the False Claims Act's first-to-file rule barred the whistleblowers' fraud claims and that the statute's anti-retaliation provision does not cover post-employment conduct. The case involved allegations of over $118 million in fraud damages related to supposed kickback schemes through royalty agreements.

The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether courts analyzing Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause challenges should consider the gravity of a defendant's specific wrongdoing or evaluate the underlying offense purely in the abstract. This case, arising from Alaska's forfeiture of a $95,000 plane for transporting three cases of beer to a dry community, could significantly impact how courts assess whether government-imposed fines are grossly disproportional to offenses. The decision may have far-reaching imp

Under section 1032(b) of the California Code of Civil Procedure, "a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding" unless some statute expressly says otherwise.

In a victory for California employers, a California appellate court ruled that an employer's duty to "provide" rest and meal breaks to employees means that the employer need only make such breaks available to employees, and not that it ensure that employees actually take such breaks.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a decision that has a significant impact on the ability of employers to avoid class-wide arbitration.

We're pleased to note that U.S. Magistrate Judge James L. Cott of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently cited a New York Law Journal article written by Fox partner Glenn Grindlinger...

One of the more significant Illinois legal developments in the past month were two Illinois Supreme Court orders interpreting the state's onerous Biometric Information Protection Act (BIPA).

The New Jersey Appellate Division recently affirmed the dismissal of a complaint by a former bank employee who claimed that she was discriminated against on the basis of her disability and need to take leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA").

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that whistleblowers need not prove that their employer acted with retaliatory intent to maintain their retaliation claims under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX).

In a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court recently held that an employer could provide favorable treatment for older employees without discriminating against those within the protected age group who are younger. In so doing, the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee) in General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. v. Cline.