A borrower had previously entered into three payday loan agreements that contained arbitration provisions mandating that all claims be arbitrated in the NAF, and under the Code of Procedure of the NAF.
Farella Braun & Martel
The district court had ruled the settlement agreement inadmissible for failure to use the magic words required by the California Evidence Code.
McDermott Will & Emery
We previously reported on the Seventh Circuit's decision in United States ex rel. Nelson v. Sanford-Brown Ltd., in which the court rejected the implied certification theory of FCA liability and granted summary judgment for the defendant.
Proskauer Rose LLP
This month, the Office of Court Administration publicized three proposed changes to the NY Commercial Division Rules that received slightly less attention than the publication of the infamous Donald Trump/Billy Bush videotape and more ‘Wikileaked' Hillary Clinton campaign emails.
Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson
The Third Circuit's decision to permit CFI to proceed with its FCA claims based on a flawed and untested statistical analysis in the absence of any other evidence of fraud lays the groundwork for future abuse.
Shearman & Sterling LLP
The UK electorate's 23 June 2016 vote to leave the EU has prompted widespread debate over Brexit's various implications.
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz
Because disqualification can have a huge impact on both law firms and clients alike, we pay special attention to any decisions on the subject.
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
The D.C. Court of Appeals has adopted Federal Rule of Evidence 702 as the legal standard for determining the admissibility of expert testimony in the District of Columbia in all cases that have not yet begun trial.
In a recent decision, Corporacion Mexicana de Matenimiento Integral, S De RL De CV v Pemex-Exploracion y Produccion, No 13-4022 (2d Cir Aug 2, 2016), the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a district court decision recognising an arbitral award that had been set aside by a court in Mexico, where the arbitration was seated.
In a suit by an auto body company against a captive insurance company for rescission of certain workers compensation reinsurance participation agreements...
The Commission issued an Opinion in Certain Stainless Steel Products, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same and Certain Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-933 denying a request for an advisory opinion.
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton
In May, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Spokeo v. Robins, providing guidance on the "injury-in-fact" aspect of the constitutional standing requirement for putative class action plaintiffs.
Morrison & Foerster LLP
In a decision eagerly awaited by the financial services industry, the D.C. Circuit this week handed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) a major defeat...
Troutman Sanders LLP
Lyft Inc. avoided a putative background screening class action over alleged privacy violations on Spokeo grounds last week.
Proskauer Rose LLP
On October 5, 2016, two district courts came to opposite conclusions on whether putative class action plaintiffs had standing to bring claims based on prospective employers' failure to comply with FCRA disclosure requirements.
Ropes & Gray LLP
On July 1, 2016, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district Court's dismissal of Plaintiff's False Claims Act ("FCA") retaliation claim against all individual defendants in the case.
The McLane Law Firm
Although in the common parlance "attorneys' fees" are a "cost" of litigation, they are not what is considered a recoverable "cost."
By its express terms, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) applies only to unsolicited faxes. 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C) & (a)(5).
In sum, in 2009, several of Cox's premium cable subscribers filed suits against the company for allegedly tying the service to its set-top box rentals.
When the appellant failed to file a motion to vacate or modify an arbitration award, it waived its right to raise Section 10 or 11 of the Federal Arbitration Action ("FAA") as a defense to a motion to confirm the award.