Emery

March 15, 2000 | Law.com

By McDermott, Will & Emery

5 minute read

August 22, 2005 | Law.com

Cigarette makers must pay $424 million to tobacco growers in 14 states as part of an agreement reached in the wake of 1998's multibillion-dollar anti-smoking settlement, North Carolina's Supreme Court ruled Friday. The ruling reversed a decision by a lower court judge who sided with cigarette companies in finding the tobacco-quota buyout approved by Congress last year ended their obligation to make the payments.

By Emery P. Dalesio

3 minute read

June 08, 2005 | Legaltech News

The U.S. Supreme Court won't weigh in on a copyright lawsuit in which printer manufacturer Lexmark is trying to stop Static Control Components, a computer-chip maker, whose parts allowed cheaper toner cartridges to be used in name-brand machines. Lexmark's appeal to the Court was filed late and rejected, so the case will return to a federal district court in Kentucky. Static Control contends that Lexmark engaged in anticompetitive and monopolistic conduct.

By Emery P. Dalesio

2 minute read

May 29, 2003 | Law.com

The federal government is siding with a whistleblower who is suing Pfizer and a subsidiary, accusing them of illegally marketing the epilepsy drug Neurontin and offering lavish kickbacks to doctors. The case concerns "off-label" uses of Neurontin -- prescribing the drug for uses that the FDA has not officially approved.

By Theo Emery

2 minute read

October 31, 2003 | Law.com

Static Control Components Inc. said it has won a round in its fight over whether the company can sell computer chips that match remanufactured toner cartridges to Lexmark International printers. Static Control said the U.S. Copyright Office ruled that its chip sales are not barred by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Lexmark had cited the federal law as a basis for a lawsuit against Static Control.

By Emery P. Dalesio

3 minute read

June 08, 2005 | Law.com

The U.S. Supreme Court won't weigh in on a copyright lawsuit in which printer manufacturer Lexmark is trying to stop Static Control Components, a computer-chip maker, whose parts allowed cheaper toner cartridges to be used in name-brand machines. Lexmark's appeal to the Court was filed late and rejected, so the case will return to a federal district court in Kentucky. Static Control contends that Lexmark engaged in anticompetitive and monopolistic conduct and should pay damages of more than $100 million.

By Emery P. Dalesio

2 minute read

June 08, 2005 | National Law Journal

The U.S. Supreme Court won't weigh in on a copyright lawsuit in which printer manufacturer Lexmark is trying to stop Static Control Components, a computer-chip maker, whose parts allowed cheaper toner cartridges to be used in name-brand machines. Lexmark's appeal to the Court was filed late and rejected, so the case will return to a federal district court in Kentucky. Static Control contends that Lexmark engaged in anticompetitive and monopolistic conduct and should pay damages of more than $100 million.

By Emery P. Dalesio

2 minute read

June 30, 2003 | Law.com

When Cynthia Papageorge found out she was pregnant, she expected to get plenty of support from her employer, one of the world's biggest sellers of maternity clothing. Instead, she has filed suit against Mothers Work and its vice president, alleging the company fired her because she was pregnant. The suit claims the company discriminated against Papageorge due to her gender and her pregnancy.

By Theo Emery

2 minute read

January 06, 2006 | Corporate Counsel

Homer Simpson -- or the writers behind him -- might have a few less places to shop for doughnuts, now that Krispy Kreme has terminated the license of its largest franchise operator in a royalties dispute. Krispy Kreme announced that Great Circle Family Foods, which runs 28 Southern California locations, must remove Krispy Kreme signs and symbols from its stores within 30 days. In September, Great Circle partners sued Krispy Kreme, claiming it was trying to force them into bankruptcy.

By Emery P. Dalesio

3 minute read

October 27, 2010 | Law.com

Lists that identify the books, music and movies individual customers bought from online retailer Amazon.com are protected from North Carolina tax collectors, a federal judge has ruled. Amazon said in an April lawsuit that disclosing the names, addresses and purchases of customers as requested by the North Carolina Revenue Department would harm anyone who may have bought controversial books or movies. At stake are potentially millions of dollars in taxes that North Carolina contends Amazon was responsible for collecting.

By Emery P. Dalesio

4 minute read