Search Results

Pearsall v. Medtronics, Inc., CV 14-3378

Publication Date: 2015-12-15
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court, Eastern District
Judge: District Judge Leonard Wexler
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Attorneys for Plaintiff By: Brian M. Dratch, Esq., Franzblau Dratch, P.C., New York, NY.
for defendant: Attorneys for Defendant By: Andrew J. Calica, Esq., Mayer Brown LLP, Andrew E. Tauber, Esq., Daniel L. Ring, Esq., Chicago, IL.
Case Number: CV 14-3378

Cite as: Pearsall v. Medtronics , CV 14-3378, NYLJ 1202744753542, at *1 (EDNY, Decided December 7, 2015) CASENAME Furman Pearsall, Plaintiff v. Medtronics

Mondaca-Vega v. Lynch

Publication Date: 2015-12-15
Practice Area:
Industry:
Date Filed: 2015-12-15
Court: 9th Cir.
Judge: Before: Sidney R. Thomas, Chief Judge and Harry Pregerson, Alex Kozinski, Barry G. Silverman, William A. Fletcher, Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Jay S. Bybee, N. Randy Smith, Mary H. Murguia, Jacqueline H. Nguyen and Andrew D. Hurwitz, Circuit Judges.
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Matt Adams (argued), Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Seattle, Washington; and Martha H. Rickey, Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Granger, Washington, for Petitioner.
for defendant: August E. Flentje (argued), Stuart F. Delery, Colin A. Kisor, Elizabeth J. Stevens, Aaron S. Goldsmith, Katherine E.M. Goettel, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Case Number: No. 03-71369

Cite as 14 C.D.O.S. 13226 SALVADOR MONDACA-VEGA, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Atto

Expressions Hair Design v. Attorney General of the State of New York, 13‐4533

Publication Date: 2015-12-14
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Judge: Before: Wesley, Livingston, and Carney, C.JJ.
Attorneys: For plaintiff: For Plaintiffs‐Appellees: Gary Friedman, Friedman Law Group, LLP, New York, NY, on the brief, Deepak Gupta, Gupta Beck PLLC, Washington, DC. For Amici Curiae The Kroger Company, Safeway Inc., Walgreen Co., Food Lion, LLC, Hy‐Vee Inc., H.E. Butt Grocery Co., The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc., Albertson's LLC, and Rite Aid Corp., in support of Plaintiffs‐Appellees: Linda P. Nussbaum, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., New York, NY. For Amici Curiae Consumer Action, National Association of Consumer Advocates, National Consumers League, and U.S. Public Interest Research Group, in support of Plaintiffs‐Appellees: J. Douglas Richards, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, New York, NY.
for defendant: For Defendant‐Appellant Eric T. Schneiderman, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of New York: Barbara D. Underwood, Solicitor General, Steven C. Wu, Deputy Solicitor General, on the brief, Judith Vale, Assistant Attorney General For Defendants‐ Appellants Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., in his official capacity as District Attorney of New York County, and Charles J. Hynes, in his official capacity as District Attorney of Kings County: Larry A. Sonnenschein, Ronald E. Sternberg, for Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York. For Amicus Curiae Credit Union Association of New York in support of Defendants‐Appellants: Henry C. Meier, Associate General Counsel.
Case Number: 13‐4533

Cite as: Expressions v. Schneiderman, 13‐4533, NYLJ 1202744761352, at *1 (2d Cir., Decided September 29, 2015) CASE NAME Expressions Hair Design, Linda Fiacco,

December 14, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Surveying the Application of 'Daimler' in the Circuits

The decision in Daimler v. Bauman,1 is hailed as "arguably the most important U.S. Supreme Court rulin

1 minute read

December 11, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Surveying the Application of 'Daimler' in the Circuits

Stephen Baldini, Anthony Pierce and Stanley Woodward of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld write: The watershed decision in 'Daimler' reversed the notion that companies with substantial sales throughout the United States can be sued anywhere. While it has been nearly two years since the decision, there have been notably few challenges to the exercise of general personal jurisdiction in the U.S. federal circuit courts. Those courts that have addressed the issue, however, highlight who the beneficiaries of 'Daimler' are: non-U.S. entities, entities sued in inconvenient forums, and, potentially, entities whose websites are accessible in many jurisdictions.

1 minute read

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Cornerstone Homes, Inc. v. Fleet, 6:15-cv-06484

Publication Date: 2015-12-09
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court, Western District
Judge: District Judge Michael Telesca
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 6:15-cv-06484

Cite as: The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Cornerstone Homes, Inc. v. Fleet, 6:15-cv-06484, NYLJ 1202744261153, at *1 (WDNY, Decided December 2, 2015) C

December 7, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Second Circuit Guidance on Pleading Title VII Claims Under 'Iqbal'

When the U.S. Supreme Court in 2009 revised the federal pleading requirements, plaintiffs' attorneys had to master the concept of "plausibility" for the first time. They also b

1 minute read

Davis-Payne v. Galie, 6:09-cv-06363

Publication Date: 2015-12-07
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court, Western District
Judge: District Judge Michael Telesca
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 6:09-cv-06363

Cite as: Davis-Payne v. Galie, 6:09-cv-06363, NYLJ 1202743987648, at *1 (WDNY, Decided November 25, 2015) CASENAME Chanikka Davis-Payne, Plaintiff v. John Gali

December 6, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Second Circuit Guidance on Pleading Title VII Claims Under 'Iqbal'

Stephen Bergstein writes that piece by piece, the Second Circuit has issued rulings detailing how to plead various civil claims after the U.S. Supreme Court in 'Ashcroft v. Iqbal' revised the federal pleading requirements. In 2013, the Second Circuit issued a series of decisions addressing plausibility pleading under the FLSA. It has now done so for discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

1 minute read

Matter of Defend H20 v. Town Board of The Town of East Hampton, 15-cv-2349

Publication Date: 2015-12-02
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court, Eastern District
Judge: District Judge Arthur Spatt
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: The Law Offices of Carl Andrew Irace & Associates, PLLC, East Hampton, NY.
for defendant: Attorneys for the Town Board of the Town of East Hampton by: David H. Arntsen, Esq., John Denby, Esq., Anne C. Leahey, Esq., of Counsel, Devitt Spellman Barrett, LLP, Smithtown, NY. By: Gail M. Lolis, Assistant County Attorney, Leonard G. Kapsalis, Assistant County Attorney, Suffolk County Dept. of Law, Hauppauge, NY. By: Kevin G.W. Olson, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the New York Attorney General, New York, NY. By: Edwin R. Cortes, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Robert B. Kambic, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY.
Case Number: 15-cv-2349

Cite as: Defend H20 v. East Hampton, 15-cv-2349, NYLJ 1202743778866, at *1 (EDNY, Decided November 30, 2015) CASE NAME In the Matter of Defend H20, Kevin McAll