As Consumers Push for More Competitive Internet Marketplace, It’s Important to Remember Courts’ Role

By | LXBN | November 18, 2014
Photo Credit: Ѕolo cc

As the Internet grows more and more ubiquitous in our lives, it’s about time that legislation is finally catching up. Much has been made of net neutrality lately, so how did we get here? A recent article for The New York Times says that it might have nothing to do with technology and everything to do with economics.

Third Circuit Continues Trend of Creating Class Certification Hurdles for Mutli-State Class Actions

Third Circuit Continues Trend of Creating Class Certification Hurdles for Mutli-State Class Actions

The Third Circuit recently ruled in Grandalski v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., that the common law claims in a nationwide class action were not appropriate for class treatment because the court would be required to conduct an individual analysis and application of each state’s law and therefore common questions of law did not predominate. 

Removing All Doubt: The First Circuit Clarifies the Conditions Triggering the 30-Day Removal Window When the Earlier, Initial Pleading Does Not Disclose Grounds for Removal

Removing All Doubt: The First Circuit Clarifies the Conditions Triggering the 30-Day Removal Window When the Earlier, Initial Pleading Does Not Disclose Grounds for Removal

In Romulus v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., No. 14-1937, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20548 (1st Cir. Oct. 24, 2014), the First Circuit Court of Appeals clarified the conditions triggering a defendant’s 30-day window to remove a case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, when the earlier, initial pleading did not disclose a basis for CAFA removal. 

Personal Liability for Corporate Officials Under U.S. Import Laws

By | The D&O Diary | November 17, 2014
Personal Liability for Corporate Officials Under U.S. Import Laws

Import laws and custom duties are not areas of the law into which I frequently (or lightly) venture, but I delve into these topics here and now because developments in these areas have served up yet another example where individual corporate officers have been held liable personally for matters that previously had been regarded exclusively as the source of corporate liability.