Gary Young

October 23, 2003 | Law.com

A May decision that states are subject to private lawsuits under the Family and Medical Leave Act left many court watchers wondering if the U.S. Supreme Court had decided its efforts to rehabilitate state sovereign immunity had gone far enough. And a fomenting split among the circuits on an issue of disability discrimination may give the high court the chance to revisit that question.

By Gary Young

10 minute read

May 11, 2004 | Law.com

Revisiting the landmark State Farm case, in which the U.S. Supreme Court reiterated the message that the due process clause puts a cap on verdicts, Utah's highest court slashed punitive damages from $145 million to just above $9 million. Even so, tort reform proponents have been quick to portray the Utah Supreme Court's April 23 decision as a betrayal of State Farm.

By Gary Young

4 minute read

July 08, 2003 | Law.com

The U.S. Supreme Court and the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals handed down class action decisions within days of each other in June. But it was the 7th Circuit's decision in a Firestone tire case that bowled over attorneys with its sweeping -- and, some say, wrongheaded -- curtailment of state court authority to certify nationwide classes after a federal court has declined to do so.

By Gary Young

4 minute read

April 13, 2001 | Law.com

Reversing itself, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled even though a plaintiff never filed a retaliation charge with the EEOC, she was entitled to a jury award won on a subsequent retaliation claim. The decision brings the 1st Circuit in line with other circuits that have eased the exhaustion requirement for workers who claim that they faced retaliation after accusing their employers of discrimination.

By Gary Young

5 minute read

March 05, 2003 | Law.com

An appellate court ruling that reversed a $25 million punitive damages award appears to be part of a trend of greater judicial scrutiny of arbitration awards. Although there are differences of opinion in assessing the trend, experts such as University of Michigan law Professor Theodore J. St. Antoine believes that arbitration proceedings are increasingly raising issues of public concern, making it inevitable that courts will continue to intervene.

By Gary Young

5 minute read

August 09, 2004 | Law.com

The House Judiciary Committee recently approved the "Family Movie Act," a bill that would immunize some manufacturers and retailers of movie-filtering technology from trademark and copyright worries. The suit that prompted the bill is a tale of strife and woe that features movie-filtering companies as upholders of family values and movie studios as aggrieved copyright holders with several famous directors putting in cameos as beleaguered artists.

By Gary Young

4 minute read

November 15, 2001 | Law.com

An Ohio appellate court has ruled that two companies that advance money to personal injury plaintiffs on the understanding that they will be repaid only if the plaintiffs prevail, are making loans -- not "contingent advances" -- and violated state usury and lender-registration laws. One expert says the ruling is the first in which a court has found a litigation finance company in violation of a usury law.

By Gary Young

7 minute read

August 24, 2001 | Law.com

Days after Maryland's highest court likened a federally funded study that used healthy children to test the effectiveness of lead paint abatement to the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, the Department of Health and Human Services opened an investigation into the study. The court told researchers who conduct nontherapeutic studies they have a duty of care toward participants, and can be liable for damages if that duty is breached.

By Gary Young

6 minute read

July 12, 2004 | The Legal Intelligencer

Despite a string of defeats before federal trial judges, Howard W. Foster has doggedly pressed on with a type of litigation he pioneered: using RICO to target companies that allegedly hire undocumented workers for the purpose of driving down wages.

By Gary Young

4 minute read

October 09, 2000 | Law.com

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a judgment in favor of a student who was expelled by the Knoxville, Tenn., Board of Education under its "zero tolerance" policy for possessing a knife. Nonetheless, the Board failed to convince the court that the high school junior could be expelled for the offense if he didn't even know the knife was in his car.

By Gary Young

9 minute read