Litigation Law, Mediation Law and Arbitration Law

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has refined corporate negligence liability rules for nursing home management entities, establishing that only licensed healthcare providers with direct patient contracts can face direct corporate negligence claims. This landmark decision clarifies the boundaries of liability when operational duties are delegated to management companies, potentially reshaping how nursing home litigation proceeds in Pennsylvania.

Can employers be held liable when employees use workplace technology to perpetrate cyber sexual abuse? This analysis explores how existing civil rights laws and employment statutes may provide immediate legal remedies for survivors, even as legislators work to develop new protections against technology-enabled harassment.

The award recognizes distinguished attorneys and public-interest advocates whose careers have advanced consumer protection, challenged corporate misconduct, and improved public safety.

The Federal Circuit issued several significant patent decisions this week, addressing critical questions about prior art dating, design patent infringement standards, and the scope of preliminary injunctions. These rulings clarify important procedural and substantive issues that will impact patent litigation strategy and Patent Trial and Appeal Board proceedings.

The Seventh Circuit has outlined a framework for dismissing qui tam actions brought by outsiders who lack inside information and rely on speculation rather than particularized facts. As data miners increasingly file False Claims Act lawsuits using publicly available information—encouraged by the DOJ's new FOCUS initiative—this decision provides defendants with a potential path to challenge such complaints at the pleading stage.

On July 9, 2026, the United States District Court for the Central District of California issued its decision in So Cal Storage, LLC et al. v. UNITS Franchising Group, Inc., 2026 WL 2045621 (C.D. Cal. July 9, 2026), granting a franchisor's motion to dismiss the franchisees’ claims arising from alleged misrepresentations, software failures, vendor restrictions, and misuse of advertising fund contributions.

The D.C. Circuit Court has unanimously upheld the EPA's designation of PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA, rejecting industry challenges and confirming expanded federal enforcement powers. This ruling triggers immediate compliance requirements including mandatory release reporting, property disclosure obligations, and transportation labeling for these widely-used PFAS compounds.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld EPA's designation of PFOA and PFOS as CERCLA hazardous substances, rejecting challenges from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce regarding the agency's interpretation of "substantial danger" and cost-benefit analysis. This landmark decision significantly expands EPA's enforcement authority and opens the door to federal cleanup requirements and cost recovery litigation for PFAS contamination.

A federal appeals court has upheld EPA's authority to designate PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA, rejecting industry challenges to the agency's interpretation of the "may present substantial danger" standard. The decision clarifies that EPA need only demonstrate a scientifically supported possibility of serious harm, not certainty, when designating substances for Superfund liability.

A federal court in Colorado denied conditional certification of a nationwide FLSA collective action, finding that a former DaVita nurse failed to provide sufficient evidence of a common policy regarding unpaid rest breaks across 41 states.

A Minnesota federal court has again dismissed a proposed class action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Former worker Thomas Matula accused Wells Fargo of improperly using forfeited funds from its 401(k) plan.

On August 10, 2026, the Department of Justice filed its opening brief in the consolidated Federal Circuit appeal challenging the Court of International Trade’s universal injunctions governing IEEPA duty refunds. The government’s own brief concedes that those injunctions now matter to exactly one group: importers with finally liquidated entries who have not filed suit. If the Federal Circuit vacates, that group has no administrative path to a refund, because CBP has told the court it lacks statutory authority to reliquidate finally liquidated entries on its own initiative.