Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Complex Lit Blog

1. Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955 (2007). No one can possibly know what Rule 8(a)(2) means any more. Before Twombly, courts would occasionally find complaints too long and detailed to satisfy the “short and plain statement of the case” requirement of Rule 8(a)(2). Twombly then proceeded to read Rule 8(a)(2) as requiring ...
1. Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 127 S. Ct. 1955 (2007). No one can possibly know what Rule 8(a)(2) means any more. Before Twombly, courts would occasionally find complaints too long and detailed to satisfy the “short and plain statement of…
The plaintiffs’ expert in Boim v. Holy Land Foundation, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 29864 (7th Cir. Dec. 28, 2007), relied in part on internet website postings in which the terrorist organization Hamas took credit for the murder of plaintiffs’ decedent. The panel majority ruled that the expert failed sufficiently to elucidate the basis for his conclusion that t ...
The plaintiffs’ expert in Boim v. Holy Land Foundation, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 29864 (7th Cir. Dec. 28, 2007), relied in part on internet website postings in which the terrorist organization Hamas took credit for the murder of plaintiffs’ decedent.…
Toussie v. County of Suffolk, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93988 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2007): • “In general, the obligation to preserve evidence arises when [a] party has notice that the evidence is relevant to litigation or when a party should have known that the evidence may be relevant to future litigation." • “At times, th ...
Toussie v. County of Suffolk, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93988 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2007): • “In general, the obligation to preserve evidence arises when [a] party has notice that the evidence is relevant to litigation or when a party should…
The New York Appellate Division, First Department, ruled on Thursday, December 27, 2007, that the attorney-client relationship between class counsel and absent class members is limited in scope and, specifically, does not require class counsel to turn over work product to every absent class member. The decision, Wyly v. Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman, LLP,
The New York Appellate Division, First Department, ruled on Thursday, December 27, 2007, that the attorney-client relationship between class counsel and absent class members is limited in scope and, specifically, does not require class counsel to turn over work product…
As amended effective December 1, 2000, Federal Rule of Evidence 701 contemplates that lay witnesses may testify to opinions that are "(a) rationally based on the perception of the witness, (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness' testimony or the determination of a fact in issue, and (c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge ...
As amended effective December 1, 2000, Federal Rule of Evidence 701 contemplates that lay witnesses may testify to opinions that are “(a) rationally based on the perception of the witness, (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’ testimony…
In a major decision addressing expert evidence in trademark litigation, District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, in Louis Vuitton Malletier, v. Dooney & Bourke, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91934 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 13, 2007), excluded voluminous expert evidence — largely survey evidence, but damages evidence as well — for failure to satisfy Rule 702 (Daubert ...
In a major decision addressing expert evidence in trademark litigation, District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, in Louis Vuitton Malletier, v. Dooney & Bourke, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91934 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 13, 2007), excluded voluminous expert evidence — largely survey…
The key waiver issue in Quiksilver, Inc. v. Kymsta Corp, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92905 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2007), centered on the defendant’s claim that that plaintiff impliedly waived its attorney-client privilege by filing this trademark infringement action, on the theory that the action "involv[ed] registrations acquired via the applications prosecuted b ...
The key waiver issue in Quiksilver, Inc. v. Kymsta Corp, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92905 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2007), centered on the defendant’s claim that that plaintiff impliedly waived its attorney-client privilege by filing this trademark infringement action, on…
Our post of October 3, 2007, discussed New York General Obligations Law § 5-701 and the question of when a an email — with the sender’s name typed at the end — may suffice to satisfy the statute of frauds in the context of a personal services contract. In contrast, Vista Dev. Corp. v. VFP Realty LLC, 17 Misc. 3d 914 (Sup. Ct. Queens County Oct. 7, 200 ...
Our post of October 3, 2007, discussed New York General Obligations Law § 5-701 and the question of when a an email — with the sender’s name typed at the end — may suffice to satisfy the statute of frauds…
“Does the fact that an amended complaint (or answer) contains an allegation that is apparently contrary to an earlier iteration of the same pleading render the later pleading a sham? The answer is: not necessarily.” So writes Chief Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski in PAE Gov’t Servs. v. MPRI, Inc., 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 29221 (9th Cir. Dec. 18, 2007). A sep ...
“Does the fact that an amended complaint (or answer) contains an allegation that is apparently contrary to an earlier iteration of the same pleading render the later pleading a sham? The answer is: not necessarily.” So writes Chief Circuit Judge…

Recent Posts

Archives