• Rivera v. The Nemours Found

    Publication Date: 2023-08-21
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel Rivera, Philadelphia, PA, pro se plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kathleen Furey McDonough, Jennifer Penberthy Buckley, Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: 21-1825-CFC

    Court denied employer motion for summary judgment on former employee's discrimination/wrongful termination claim where employee alleged that his supervisor directed a discriminatory remark towards him, creating a triable issue of fact as to pretext where employer terminated employee for using inappropriate language but, despite being informed of the supervisor's comment, imposed no discipline on the supervisor.

  • Hickey v. Univ. of Pittsburgh

    Publication Date: 2023-08-21
    Practice Area: Education Law
    Industry: Education
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Krause
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gary F. Lynch, Lynch Carpenter, Pittsburgh, PA; Jeffrey A. Klafter, Seth R. Lesser, Klafter Lesser, Rye Brook, NY; Eric Poulin, Poulin, Willey & Anastopoulo, Charleston, SC; Roy T. Willey, IV, Anastopoulo Law Firm, Charleston, SC; Stuart A. Carpey, Plymouth Meeting, PA; Edward W. Ciolko, Nicholas Colella, Jamisen A. Etzel, Gary F. Lynch, Lynch Carpenter, Pittsburgh, PA for appellants.
    for defendant: James C. Martin, Colin E. Wrabley, Reed Smith, Pittsburgh, PA; Gerard A. Dever, Roberta D. Liebenberg, Fine Kaplan & Black, Philadelphia, PA; Burt M. Rublin, Ballard Spahr, Philadelphia, PA for appellees.

    Case Number: 21-2013

    College students plausibly stated breach of implied contract claim from universities' switch to online learning due to COVID-19 pandemic where marketing materials emphasized benefits of on-campus instruction from attending each university.

  • Prolitec Inc. v. ScentAir Technologies, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-08-21
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Bryson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-984-WCB

    In considering a motion to stay proceedings pending completion of an ex parte reexamination of the patent claims by the patent office, the court concluded that, while there was some risk of prejudice to defendant given that the parties were competitors, that risk was outweighed by the potential that the reexamination proceedings would simplify the issues in the case.

  • In Re: Proton Pump Inhibitors Prod. Liab. Litig.

    Publication Date: 2023-08-21
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Manufacturing | Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
    Judge: Judge Davis
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas G. Macauley, Macauley LLC, Wilmington, DE; Martin Bienstock, Bienstock PLLC, Washington, D.C. for plaintiff.
    for defendant: James J. Freebery, Daniel J. Brown, Makenzie Windfelder, Hayley J. Reese, Chelsea A. Botsch, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Arthur E. Brown, William Hoffman, Matthew Douglas, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, New York, NY; Amy K. Fisher, Katherine D. Althoff, Carolyn E. Riggs, Ice Miller LLP, Indianapolis, IN; Philip A. Rovner, Jonathan A. Choa, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sherry Knutson, Tucker Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL; Craig A. Thompson, Venable LLP, Baltimore, MD for defendants.

    Case Number: N17C-07-001 PPI

    Plaintiff brought the underlying personal injury action against defendants alleging that defendants were responsible for developing, manufacturing, marketing, and distributing proton pump inhibitor products that were unsafe, defectively designed, lacked proper warnings, and were unfit to be marketed and sold in the United States. Defendants individually and collectively moved to dismiss the claims. Plaintiff brought the case as administrator of a health care plan directly and as subrogee of its members' claims for a variety of injurie

  • REO Trust 2017-RPL1 v. Short Sale, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-08-14
    Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Real Estate
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Brennan
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Janet Charlton, Michael Pak, McCabe, Weisberg & Conway, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Robert J. Valihura, Morton, Valihura & Zerbato, LLC, Greenville DE for defendant.

    Case Number: N20L-10-029 DJB

    Although mortgagor should have been noticed in second foreclosure action filed against purchaser at first sheriff's sale, the mortgagor's failure to participate in prior foreclosure action and purchaser being placed on constructive notice of potential mortgage liens on the property meant no interested party was prejudiced by the defect.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Land Use Law: Zoning in the 21st Century

    Authors: Brent Denzin, Julie A. Tappendorf, Adam Simon, David S. Silverman, Gregory W. Jones, Daniel J. Bolin

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Sapp v. Indus. Action Servs., LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-08-14
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Ambro
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Maureen Farrell, Adam T. Muery, Muery & Farrell, Austin, TX for appellants
    for defendant: David J. Baldwin, Berger Harris, Wilmington, DE; Irving M. Geslewitz, Edward D. Shapiro, Much Law, Chicago, IL for appellees.

    Case Number: 22-2181

    District court erred in ordering arbitration where dispute resolution clause imposing narrow scope of review of solely factual issues during a short window of time indicated that the dispute resolution provision constituted an expert determination rather than an arbitration.

  • Port Hamilton Refining & Transp., LLLP v. U.S. Envt'l Prot. Agency

    Publication Date: 2023-08-14
    Practice Area: Environmental Law
    Industry: Energy | Federal Government
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Smith
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew C. Simpson, Andrew C. Simpson Law Offices, Christiansted, VI for petitioner.
    for defendant: Todd S. Kim, Heather E. Gange, United States Department of Justice Environment & Natural Resources Division, Washington, DC for respondent.

    Case Number: 23-1094

    EPA's "reactivation" policy deeming a shut-down facility as "new" upon resumption of operations improperly extended scope of Prevention of Significant Deterioration program under the Clean Air Act, which expressly applied only to new and modified facilities.

  • New Wood Res. LLC v. Baldwin

    Publication Date: 2023-08-14
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Rennie
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard P. Rollo, Travis S. Hunter, Jordan L. Cramer, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Sean J. Bellew, Bellew LLC, Wilmington, DE; Chris L. Gilbert, Gilbert PC, Dallas, TX for defendant.

    Case Number: N20C-10-231- SKR CCLD

    Ruling that under Delaware law a person is presumed to act in good faith unless evidence is presented to the contrary, the court ruled that defendant had not demonstrated that plaintiff was motivated by bad faith and had, thus, breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing under the terms of their contract. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment granted.

  • Blue Valley, LLC v. Klein

    Publication Date: 2023-08-14
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Rennie
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John Harris, Esquire, Harry Shenton IV, Berger Harris LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: John Klein, Tampa, FL, pro se defendant.

    Case Number: N20C-03-300 SKR CCLD

    The court ruled that it did not need to reach an offensive collateral estoppel analysis because plaintiff had carried its burden of proof for summary judgment on the merits demonstrating a breach of the indemnification agreement at issue.

  • Mylan Inc. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

    Publication Date: 2023-08-14
    Practice Area: Tax
    Industry: Federal Government | Manufacturing | Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Jordan
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Clint Carpenter, Arthur T. Catterall, United States Department of Justice Tax Division, Washington, DC; Emily J. Giometti, Cincinnati, OH; Lisa M. Rodriguez, Office of District Council, Internal Revenue Service, Newark, NJ; Mary H. Weber, Internal Revenue Service Office of Chief Counsel, Cincinnati, OH for appellant.
    for defendant: Gregory G. Garre, Eric Konopka, Latham & Watkins, Washington, DC; Bryan M. Killian, William F. Nelson, James G. Steele, III, Morgan Lewis & Bockius, Washington, DC for appellee.

    Case Number: 22-1193

    Legal expenses incurred by generic drug manufacturers to defend against patent infringement lawsuits were tax-deductible where they were ordinary and necessary business expenses as patent litigation was separate from the FDA approval process for ANDAs.