Litigation Law, Mediation Law and Arbitration Law

Recent federal court decisions have reshaped the landscape for website tracking privacy litigation, with four rulings favoring defendants while one demonstrates how plaintiffs can still prevail with properly pleaded claims. These cases establish critical precedents for defending against wiretapping, invasion-of-privacy, and computer-fraud allegations based on pixel and cookie-tracking technologies.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Rickes v. Thermo Fisher Scientific examines whether email-based notices alone can establish mutual assent to arbitration agreements and class action waivers. The court held that merely sending emails containing arbitration terms, without evidence of actual viewing or affirmative interaction, fails to demonstrate the assent required for contract formation under California law.

A federal court has denied a plaintiff's attempt to amend his ultra-processed food lawsuit, reinforcing that epidemiological correlations cannot substitute for specific causation in product liability cases. The ruling highlights the fundamental challenge facing personal injury plaintiffs who seek to attribute chronic diseases to consumption of multiple products from different manufacturers over extended periods.

The Federal Circuit reversed a $49.4 million jury verdict in a patent infringement case involving drug-releasing biodegradable fiber implants, finding that the University of Texas's patent was anticipated by prior art...

A federal court in Ohio has ordered Aaron Michael Jones, once considered the undisputed king of illegal robocalls responsible for billions of unwanted calls, to pay $83.7 million...

Strong courtroom advocacy begins long before opening statements, with early case strategy sessions that define priorities, test assumptions, and align trial teams around a unified message. This integrated approach combines jury research, expert testimony, trial graphics, and legal arguments into a cohesive framework that strengthens cases from discovery through verdict.

Gerald Lane, one of the nation's most prolific TCPA case filers with over 700 cases in two years, has been subject to 145 orders to show cause for failing to prosecute his cases in California's Central District. A federal judge has ordered Lane to explain his case management procedures and detail every OSC he has faced, raising questions about whether the courts have been too lenient with only one $250 sanction despite the extraordinary number of warnings.

A New Jersey law firm faces over $100,000 in sanctions after filing what opposing counsel claims is a deceptive legal malpractice lawsuit. The case centers on allegations that Cooper Levenson...

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court will review a landmark medical malpractice case involving a $207 million judgment, examining whether hospitals can be held vicariously liable without explicit jury findings against named agents. The court will also resolve a critical split among appellate panels regarding whether liability can be established through increased risk of harm rather than direct factual causation.

A federal judge in Florida has ordered TCPA defendant Czar Marketing Group to appear in court with their CRM system for live examination after defense counsel failed to produce promised discovery records. The court's unprecedented decision to conduct an in-person evidentiary hearing stems from suspicious similarities between production documents and concerns about altered records, raising questions about discovery compliance and potential spoliation.

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act shields foreign states from suit in the United States, but determining whether an entity qualifies as the foreign state itself, a political subdivision, or an agency or instrumentality can be complex. This classification affects critical procedural and substantive protections, including service of process rules, immunity defenses, and attachment protections. Understanding these distinctions is essential from the outset of any case involving sovereign defendants.

The Supreme Court of Ohio has issued a landmark decision reinforcing the finality of binding insurance appraisal awards, establishing that courts will only set aside such awards in exceptional circumstances involving fraud or manifest mistake. The ruling clarifies the stringent pleading requirements parties must meet when attempting to challenge completed appraisals, particularly when alleging newly discovered property damage. This decision has significant implications for how property insurance disputes ar