Litigation Law, Mediation Law and Arbitration Law

The Eleventh Circuit's reversal in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates addresses one of the most anticipated False Claims Act decisions in years, ruling that qui tam provisions do not violate the Appointments Clause. While this decision aligns with other circuit courts, it leaves critical constitutional questions unresolved, including Take Care and Vesting Clause challenges that could reshape FCA litigation.

When legal issues arise, many New Jersey businesses default to a "no comment" stance, believing silence protects them from liability. However, this approach can allow allegations to go unanswered, critical deadlines to pass, and manageable disputes to escalate into costly litigation. Understanding when silence serves your interests versus when it creates unnecessary risk is essential for protecting your business.

A federal court applies the century-old Robins Dry Dock rule to dismiss and narrow claims arising from the Baltimore bridge collapse, reinforcing limitations on recovering purely economic losses in maritime law. The decision examines which parties can seek damages when infrastructure failures disrupt commerce and cause financial harm without direct physical injury to property.

The Eleventh Circuit's reversal in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates addresses one of the most anticipated False Claims Act decisions in years, ruling that qui tam provisions do not violate the Appointments Clause. While this decision aligns with other circuit courts, it leaves critical constitutional questions unresolved, including Take Care and Vesting Clause challenges that could reshape FCA litigation.

The Federal Circuit dismissed a patent owner's appeal in In re Hybir, Inc., ruling that a settlement agreement containing only a nominal $100 optional license tied to the appeal's outcome failed to create a live case or controversy. The court determined that such an arbitrary sum functioned merely as a "side bet" on the appeal rather than representing real economic significance or concrete dispute necessary to sustain federal jurisdiction.

The Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Comet Technologies USA, Inc. v. XP Power, LLC overturned a $40 million trade secret verdict, exposing a critical distinction between federal and state trade secret law regarding burden of proof. The court found that jury instructions applicable under California's Uniform Trade Secrets Act improperly shifted the burden of proving information was "readily ascertainable" from the plaintiff to the defendant under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act.

States across the country are expanding anti-SLAPP protections, with nine states enacting or strengthening laws since 2025. Most have adopted the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA), giving defendants new tools to seek early dismissal of lawsuits.

A federal court has awarded Blake Lively over $400,000 in attorneys' fees and costs under California's new anti-SLAPP statute after dismissing a defamation claim brought against her for speaking out about workplace harassment. This landmark ruling marks the first fee award under California Civil Code section 47.1, which protects communications about sexual harassment, discrimination, and retaliation—raising critical questions about the financial risks employers face when responding to workplace allega

Over the last few weeks, a lawsuit brought by a former JPMorgan Chase banker alleging sexual harassment and assault against the bank and a senior executive within its leveraged finance division has made headlines. The salacious complaint alleges that the executive subjected the plaintiff to sexual harassment, sexual assault, and retaliation during his employment. It also alleges that the bank defamed the plaintiff when it made derogatory claims about him to others in the financial services industry post-employment.

Plaintiffs' experts in antitrust class actions often employ a two-step econometric method to demonstrate common impact across class members. New research reveals fundamental flaws in this widely-used approach, showing how it systematically produces false positives and identifies class-wide impact even when no actual harm occurred.

Oregon is fast becoming one of the most consequential jurisdictions in class action litigation. A convergence of newly enacted state laws, aggressive local judicial developments, and the powerful structural incentives created by Oregon’s statutory damages framework has made the Beaver State a magnet for plaintiffs’ attorneys targeting consumer-facing businesses.

A federal court in North Carolina has ruled that text messages do not fall under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act's private right of action for violations of the national do-not-call registry. This decision adds to a growing circuit split on whether Section 227(c)(5) of the TCPA covers text messages, with courts now divided across multiple federal circuits on this critical interpretation.