Litigation Law, Mediation Law and Arbitration Law

Summer driving in New Jersey looks different. Roads are more crowded, construction is everywhere, and there are more people out walking, biking, or riding e‑bikes. Add in long trips, unpredictable weather, and everyday distractions, and the margin for error gets smaller. It is not just busier out there, it is riskier.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has drawn a firm line around the statutory protections afforded to dissolved LLCs. In Dravo LLC, the court unanimously held that plaintiffs cannot bypass the Pennsylvania Uniform...

According to a recent Eastern District of Pennsylvania decision, attorneys alleged to have directed medical providers to manufacture fraudulent evidence cannot claim Petition Clause immunity.

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell addresses whether federal pesticide labeling law preempts state tort claims alleging failure to warn about cancer risks not required by EPA. This landmark ruling resolves a circuit split and has significant implications for product liability litigation involving FIFRA-regulated pesticides. The decision clarifies the scope of federal preemption when EPA has affirmatively evaluated risks and approved product labeling.

A New Jersey court recently examined the critical role of reasonable reliance in fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims involving a commercial real estate transaction. The case centered on a buyer's allegations that they were misled about the number of apartment units that could be developed on a property site, raising important questions about when purchasers can legitimately rely on seller representations versus their own due diligence investigations. The court's analysis provides valuable guidance

Many human resources (HR) teams have grown accustomed to recording workplace interviews, whether through Teams, Zoom, or other tools that automatically capture audio and generate transcripts.

The Supreme Court's Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II decision has eliminated a critical preemption defense for freight brokers, exposing them to state law negligence claims for hiring unsafe motor carriers. This ruling creates unprecedented litigation risk and insurance cost implications for both U.S. and Canadian freight brokers operating in interstate commerce, prompting the Transportation Intermediaries Association to petition for federal safety selection standards.

When does gross negligence in evidence preservation cross the line into willful misconduct warranting the striking of a pleading? A Manhattan Commercial Division decision examines the boundaries of spoliation sanctions after a cybersecurity firm's pervasive preservation failures led to the loss of critical Slack messages, monitoring tickets, and alarm data spanning the period of a ransomware attack.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has issued a critical ruling that significantly narrows the circumstances under which attorneys can obtain relief for missing appellate filing deadlines. This decision underscores the extremely high bar for securing nunc pro tunc appeals and highlights the limited exceptions available when procedural deadlines are missed.

For hundreds of years, the world’s sovereign nations refused to allow any other foreign sovereign to be sued in their courts without the sovereign’s consent. The guiding principle was “absolute sovereign immunity,” an outgrowth of the ancient legal precept rex non potest peccare, understood to mean “the king can do no wrong.” The principle also was recognized as wise foreign policy because it extended "grace and comity" to other sovereigns.

The U.S. Supreme Court's April 22, 2026, decision in Hencely v. Fluor Corp. rejected the recent expansion of the government-contractor defense for private contractors working on certain federal projects...

Recent Supreme Court decisions have fundamentally reshaped the legal protections available to government contractors facing tort claims and civil litigation. The Court's rulings in GEO Group v. Menocal and Hencely v. Fluor Corp. have narrowed the scope of contractor immunities and eliminated key procedural advantages, forcing contractors to reassess their risk exposure when performing work under federal contracts.