United States: Court Procedure

Orange County Partner Cary Mullen and Associate James Werner recently secured a dismissal on summary judgment and recovery of costs for the firm's client, Kia America, Inc., in the matter of Charbel Adaimy v. Kia America, Inc., (erroneously sued as Kia Motors America, Inc.), LASC No. 23STCV24815.

After years of anticipation and development, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16.1 takes effect today, December 1, 2025.

An opinion by the Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal on November 14, 2025 clarifies the scope of Florida's fee-shifting penalty statute, section 768.79.

Abraham Lincoln once famously said that "He who represents himself has a fool for a client." While this statement has been demonstrated to be true more often than not, what happens when...

People and businesses located outside of the United States have a powerful tool to discover information, located in the United States, that may assist them with foreign litigation.

efendants moving to dismiss amended complaints under Rule 9(b) often confront the issue of whether a plaintiff can leverage and cite to materials obtained in discovery in order to meet that rule's pleading standards.

Georgia's tort reform legislation comes at an opportune time, as jury verdicts in recent years have been the stuff of records. Georgia was rated the #1 Judicial Hellhole in 2022 and 2023...

On April 29, 2025, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, dba Labcorp, v. Luke Davis, et al., No. 22-55873. The Supreme Court had granted a petition for writ of certiorari in the case as to the following question: "[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) when some members of the proposed class lack any Article III injury."

In catastrophic injury cases, corporate defendants and insurers follow a familiar playbook, animated by an institutional imperative to minimize financial exposure through controlling risk by altering the pool of available jurors to those who have preconceived ( and inappropriate ) beliefs against awarding money damages.