Martin Flumenbaum

August 23, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp, members of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, write that the Supreme Court has never addressed whether American Pipe tolling applies to putative class members who file individual actions prior to a decision on certification. The majority of lower federal courts have refused to extend the tolling doctrine in such cases, but the Second Circuit recently joined with the Tenth in holding that tolling is appropriate.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

12 minute read

October 26, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In their Second Circuit Review column, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison partners Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp discuss a recent decision where the circuit clarified the bespeaks-caution doctrine and its application to statements that "contain some elements that look forward and others that do not."

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

11 minute read

August 25, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In their Second Circuit Review, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison partners Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp, discuss the history of the FCC's regulation of indecent speech in broadcasting, and the recent decision that decisively held that the current policy chills protected speech.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

13 minute read

August 25, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp, partners at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, report on a recent decision in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit clarified the scope of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine as it applies to issues raised in Article 78 proceedings.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

11 minute read

August 24, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In their Second Circuit Review, partners Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp write that in determining how important an omission in a registration statement may have been to a reasonable investor in light of the overall context, the Second Circuit has provided two seemingly divergent approaches in a pair of recent decisions. Last month, the court reconciled these holdings.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

11 minute read

May 27, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp, partners at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, discuss ReliaStar Life Insurance Company of New York v. EMC National Life Company, where the Circuit held that the inclusion of a general provision that each party will bear the fees of its own arbitrator and attorneys in an arbitration agreement does not deprive an arbitral panel of its inherent authority to award such fees as a sanction against a party that acted in bad faith during the arbitration.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

10 minute read

May 23, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp, partners at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, report on a recent decision which clarified how district courts should calculate attorney's fees that are awarded to prevailing parties pursuant to certain federal statutes.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

12 minute read

June 24, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp, partners at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, write that in local federal courts debts arising from unpaid employer contributions can never become non-dischargeable under �523(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code ? no matter the level of authority exercised by the employer over plan assets. It remains to be seen, they say, which approach other circuit courts of appeals will follow when faced with this issue, and whether their decisions will generate a circuit split sufficiently substantial to draw Supreme Court review.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

14 minute read

December 23, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp, partners at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, discuss a recent case where the Circuit affirmed a district court decision holding that a party to a private settlement, whose terms are incorporated into an order of dismissal, is a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. �1988(b) (a fee-shifting statute governing civil rights actions), and therefore eligible for attorney's fees.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

12 minute read

February 27, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp, partners at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, examine Ogunwomoju v. United States, in which the Second Circuit ruled for the first time that a petitioner being held in immigration detention or under an order of removal as a result of a state court conviction is not "in custody" pursuant to the judgment of a state court for purposes of establishing jurisdiction to consider a habeas challenge to that conviction under 28 U.S.C. �2254.

By Martin Flumenbaum and Brad S. Karp

8 minute read