4,296 results found

Appellate Division Concludes Condemnation of Former Landfill Is Not Subject To Trust-Escrow Valuation Approach.

Lawyers handling matters involving the federal government are likely aware that a longer period applies for appealing a final judgment in federal court.

Chris Edwards, a Board Certified Specialist in Appellate Practice at Ward and Smith, P.A., shares his expertise on effective legal writing in the Q1 issue of Trial Briefs. His column provides North Carolina trial attorneys with practical strategies for crafting clearer, more persuasive appellate briefs that resonate with judges. Edwards emphasizes the critical importance of context, brevity, and careful editing in making legal arguments accessible and compelling.(for PR)

Hence, vigorous cross-examination, the presentation of contrary evidence and a careful instruction on the burden of proof were held to be the appropriate vehicles to challenge the expert's report.

A Michigan Court of Appeals just adopted the so-called "apex" deposition rule in Alberto v. Toyota Motor Corp. See ___ N.W.2d ___, 2010 WL 3057755 (Mich. Ct. App. Aug. 5, 2010).

Jeffrey M. Pollock was quoted in Law360 article, "BASF, Cahill Liable for Asbestos Evidence, 3rd Circ. Told." Full text can be found in the March 13, 2014, article, but a synopsis is noted below.

On September 29, 2011, in Bailey v. Wyeth, et al., a New Jersey appellate court affirmed summary judgment in favor of two Pfizer subsidiaries and Wyeth, Inc., dismissing claims for violations of New Jersey's Product Liability Act (PLA).

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Montana Supreme Court and concluded that BNSF Railway was not subject to general jurisdiction in Montana to answer for alleged work-related injuries occurring in North Dakota and South Dakota.

Last week, in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, 581 U.S. ___, No. 16-405, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Montana Supreme Court and concluded that BNSF Railway was not subject to...

This session we've watched SB 853 - Business Court Modernization work through the legislative process.

On April 3, 2008, the California Supreme Court unanimously held that the "sophisticated user" defense applies in California to both negligence and strict liability causes of action. Under the sophisticated user defense, "[a] manufacturer is not liable to a sophisticated user of its product for failure to warn of a risk, harm, or danger, if the sophisticated user knew or should have known of that risk, harm, or danger."

Recently, the California Supreme Court once again upheld mediation confidentiality in a unanimous and long-awaited ruling in Simmons v. Ghaderi.

On August 1, 2024, in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc., the California Supreme Court clarified an important procedural issue that relates to the resolution of Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) matters.

Vasserman, instead of filing a grievance, sued in state court for violation of the California Labor Code, including claims for a failure to pay all regular and overtime wages and a failure....

On May 22, 2017, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo announced that Justices Anil C. Singh and Jeffrey K. Oing had been appointed to fill vacancies on the bench of the Appellate Division, First Department.

Joe Palmore spoke to Communications Daily and Communications Litigation Today about the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo...

Via Section 230, the Communications Decency Act provides broad immunity for service providers, hosts and website operators for claims stemming from their publication of information created by third parties.