Filter This View

  • Relevent Sports LLC v. U.S. Soccer Fed'n Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-03-13
    Practice Area: Antitrust
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
    Judge: Circuit Judge Raymond J. Lohier, Jr.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: For Plaintiff-Appellant Relevent Sports, LLC: Linda T. Coberly, on the brief, JEFFREY L. KESSLER, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL, and New York, NY.
    for defendant: For Defendant-Appellee Fédération Internationale de Football Association: Williams T. Marks, H. Christopher Boehning, Andrew C. Finch, on the brief, Kannon K. Shanmugam, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY and Washington, DC. For Defendant-Appellee United States Soccer Federation, Inc.: Lawrence E. Buterman, Samir Deger-Sen, Christopher S. Yates, Aaron T. Chiu, Elizabeth H. Yandell, on the brief, Gregory G. Garre, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC, San Francisco, CA, and New York, NY. For Amicus Curiae United States of America, in support of Neither Party: Adam D. Chandler, Daniel E. Haar, Nickolai G. Levin, Attorneys, Kathleen S. O'Neill, Senior Director of Investigations and Litigation, on the brief, Peter M. Bozzo, Attorney, for Richard A. Powers, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC. For Amicus Curiae American Antitrust Institute, in support of Plaintiff-Appellant: Randy M. Stutz, American Antitrust Institute, Washington, DC. For Amici Curiae 14 Antitrust, Sports Law, and Economics Professors, in support of Plaintiff-Appellant: Steffen N. Johnson, Jonathan M. Jacobson, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.,
    Case Number: 21-2088-cv

    By Challenging Monopolistic 2018 Policy Soccer Promoter Alleged Concerted Action

  • March 11, 2023 | The Legal Intelligencer

    New Partners 2023

    The Legal Intelligencer congratulates the new class of partners for 2023.

    47 minute read

  • March 10, 2023 | New York Law Journal

    Breaking With Own Precedent, First Department Rules 'Extreme and Outrageous Conduct' No Longer 'Essential' to Emotional Distress Claims

    "There is no stated rationale as to why extreme and outrageous conduct would be a required element for both an intentional act as well as a negligent act," wrote appellate Justice Troy K. Webber. "As such, we now hold that extreme and outrageous conduct is not an essential element of a cause of action to recover damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress."

    6 minute read

  • March 10, 2023 | Law.com

    In AccessLex Suit Over Law Student Loan Default, 'Limitation Period Didn't Start' Until Last Payment Toward $140K+ Balance, Court Says

    "Faced with this conflicting and rather spare evidentiary record, we perceive no error in the court's determination that Philpot had failed to carry his burden of proving that lender's cause of action arose in any particular state other than Utah," stated Harris.

    5 minute read

  • March 10, 2023 | The Legal Intelligencer

    'Bilt-Rite': The Expanding Scope of 'Providers of Information' and the Evolution of a Tort

    There are circumstances where courts decline to apply Bilt-Rite despite the presence of a transfer of information accompanied by a pecuniary gain. Who, then, qualifies as a supplier of information to others for pecuniary gain subject to Section 552 liability? After nearly 20 years, a fresh look is justified.

    8 minute read

  • Appellate Division, Second Department: March 10, 2023

    Publication Date: 2023-03-10
    Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Criminal Appeals
    Industry:
    Court: Appellate Division, Second Department, Hand Down List
    Judge: Unsigned
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: DOCKET

    Handdown List released on:March 8, 2023

  • Lipman et al. v. State of Georgia

    Publication Date: 2023-03-10
    Practice Area: Health Care Law
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Judge Brown
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David Conley, Robert Ingram, (Chilivis Grubman Dalbey & Warner LLP), Atlanta, Scott Grubman, (Chilivis Grubman Dalbey & Warner LLP), Atlanta, Brittany Cambre, (Chilivis, Grubman, Dalbey & Warner LLP), Atlanta, for appellant.
    for defendant: Christopher Carr, (Attorney General), Atlanta, Sara Vann, (Office of the Attorney General, Medicaid Fraud Control Unit), Atlanta, Jessica Hall, (Georgia Office of the Attorney General), Atlanta, Mary Bryan, (Georgia Department of Law), Atlanta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A22A1659

    Violations of Federal Anti-Kickback Statute Can Support Liability Under Georgia's False Medicaid Claims Act

  • NYS v. James G.

    Publication Date: 2023-03-10
    Practice Area: Evidence
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Supreme Court, Bronx
    Judge: Justice Tara A. Collins
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 42038-2021E

    'Unspecified Paraphilic Disorder' Diagnosis Meets Reliability, Admissibility Threshold

  • IKB Intl. SA v. Morgan Stanley

    Publication Date: 2023-03-10
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking
    Court: Supreme Court, New York
    Judge: Justice Melissa A. Crane
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 653964/2012

    Issue of Fact Exists as to Reliance on Offering Documents' Alleged Misrepresentations

  • Brooks v. Brooks

    Publication Date: 2023-03-09
    Practice Area: Dispute Resolution | Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
    Judge: Judge Hodges
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph Key, Kayci Timmons, (Miller & Key, P.A.), McDonough, for appellant.
    for defendant: Thomas Cauthorn, (Cauthorn Nohr & Owen), Marietta, for appellee.
    Case Number: A22A1377

    Arbitrator in Alimony Dispute Did Not Exceed His Authority By Applying His Calculation to Award Past-Due Sums