NEXT

The Recorder

Harris v. Stampolis

4 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

In re Appeal of AMA/Am. Mktg. Ass'n, Inc., PICS Case No. 16-0789 (Pa. Commw. June 14, 2016) Simpson, J. (33 pages).

Municipal council did not err in granting applicant's conditional use application, even though applicant failed to include an easement in its conditional use plan as part of the statutorily-required components of its application. Order of the trial court affirmed.
6 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

Commonwealth v. Helminiak, PICS Case No. 16-0775 (C.P. Lycoming May 31, 2016) Butts, P.J. (9 pages).

Driver charged with DUI who had previously filed motions to suppress evidence, filed a supplemental motion to suppress evidence. Supplemental motion denied.
5 minute read

Delaware Law Weekly

Use of Drugs, Broadly Defined, Supports Probable Cause for DUI Arrest

Citing "exceptionally broad" statutory definitions of what constitutes a drug, a Court of Common Pleas judge has ruled that Delaware police officers are not required to identify the specific substances a person may have used in order to establish probable cause for a driving under the influence arrest.
6 minute read

New Jersey Law Journal

State v. Jones

DNA Match to Victim Does Not Toll Statute of Limitations
6 minute read

National Law Journal

No Daubert, No Gatekeeper?: Missouri Mass Tort Verdicts Linked to Handling of Science Evidence

When a St. Louis courthouse was the venue where three juries issued substantial verdicts this year against Johnson & Johnson and Monsanto Co., it came as little surprise to the defense bar, which has long complained about the standards under which Missouri's courts admit scientific evidence.
21 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

Understanding Standing After 'Spokeo v. Robins'

One of the most basic elements of federal-court practice is that a plaintiff must have constitutional "standing" to maintain a suit in federal court. In the closely watched case, Spokeo v. Robins, 578 U.S. No. 11-56843 (2016), the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with a frequently recurring issue—whether the mere violation of a statute itself constitutes an "injury in fact"—the "first and foremost" of the three standing requirements. "Injury in fact" is one of those legal concepts that makes intuitive sense—you have to be actually harmed before you can sue. But it can create confusion when you try to apply it to a particular case, as evidenced by the conflicting lower-court rulings that prompted the court to grant review in Spokeo.
14 minute read

Legaltech News

New York City Bar Association Uncovers Prevalent Attitudes Toward Courtroom Technology

The survey looked to find judiciary members' views on everyday technology in criminal litigation.
8 minute read

The Legal Intelligencer

Mayes v. Shope, PICS Case No. 16-0760 (Pa. Super. May 24, 2016) (memorandum) Panella, J. (18 pages).

Trial court properly refused to grant a new trial in medical malpractice case after defense witnesses improperly implicated nonparty medical professionals as the cause of appellant's injuries. Affirmed.
7 minute read

Daily Business Review

Bugging in Brazil Scandal Exposes Fear of Biggest Betrayal Yet

The tale of Brazil's political crisis is one of betrayals, and the most explosive one may be yet to come.
9 minute read

Resources

  • Why Embracing Change Is Essential for Your Legal Department

    Brought to you by DiliTrust

    Download Now

  • International Export and Trade Assistance State Law Survey

    Brought to you by LexisNexis®

    Download Now

  • How This Personal Injury Firm Reduced Client Intake Time by 80%

    Brought to you by PracticePanther

    Download Now

  • The Hidden Cost of Bad Reviews: Why Law Firms & Attorneys Can't Afford a Damaged Online Reputation

    Brought to you by Erase.com

    Download Now