Wednesday, July 20, 12 p.m. CDT
Register

Bracewell’s next event in its Power Regulatory Webinar Series will be a July 20 webinar titled “Qualifying Facilities, Exempt Wholesale Generators and Market-Based Rates: The Basics and Beyond.”

The Wednesday, July 20, webinar will begin at noon Central time.

Speakers will be Catherine P. McCarthy, Stephen J. Hug, and Blake Urban.

Future events and speakers in the series will be:

Wednesday, September 14
“Developments in Western Markets”
Deanna E. King and Stephen J. Hug

Wednesday, October 12
“FERC Audits”
Robert E. Pease and Tyler S. Johnson

Wednesday, November 9
“FERC Update on Anti-Market Manipulation – Power”
Michael W. Brooks and Serena A. Rwejuna

Register for the next webinar.

Reuters is reporting that the FBI in New York City has undisclosed probes into about 30 suspected insider trading schemes, in a sign investigators remain focused on building cases despite a court ruling that could curtail such prosecutions.

Nate Raymond writes that the investigations come amid a resurgence of insider trading cases, with prosecutors in Manhattan charging 11 people so far in 2016, up from just four in 2015.

“The probes follow a 2014 ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that authorities have said could allow some individuals to avoid prosecution and that has already led to charges being dropped or reversed for 14 defendants,” the report says.

Read the article.

Image by MB-one

A federal appeals court has overturned a historic antitrust settlement between retailers and Visa and MasterCard, reviving more than a decade of legal battles over processing fees, according to a report in The New York Times.

“The United States Court of Appeals in Manhattan said that the lawyers represented retailers with competing interests in the settlement, which was once valued at $7.25 billion, one of the largest in antitrust history,” wrote Rachel Abrams. “The judges pushed the suit back to a lower court.”

In a 2005 lawsuit, retailers accused credit card providers of scheming to fix the price of processing fees, the money the card companies charge retailers for each transaction, and a settlement was reached in 2012. But the court in Manhattan found that merchants had been “inadequately” represented in the settlement.

Read the article.

Reuters is reporting that a California jury ordered Oracle Corp. to pay Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Co. $3 billion in damages in a case over HP’s Itanium servers, an Oracle spokeswoman said on Thursday.

The Itaniuum processor is made by Intel Inc.

According to the report by Dan Levine: “Oracle decided to stop developing software for use with HP’s Itanium-based servers in 2011, saying that Intel made it clear that the chip was nearing the end of its life and was shifting its focus to its x86 microprocessor.”

“But HP said it had an agreement with Oracle that support for Itanium would continue, without which the equipment using the chip would become obsolete.”

Read the article.

Image by Michel Curi

Hillary Clinton has bashed her probable eventual opponent Donald Trump for having led four companies into bankruptcy. But she was wrong, reports Tom Winter of NBC News: Trump actually has six bankruptcies on his record.

Those business failures include five casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey, and a Manhattan hotel, he writes.

“Some may be referring to the three 1992 filings as a single bankruptcy; two of them were even filed on the same day. Or they may be lumping the three 1990s casino bankruptcies together,” Winter explains.

Read the article.

USA Today is reporting that German automaker Volkswagen Group is expected to deliver a $10 billion settlement to cover government fines and compensate owners of vehicles fitted with software that cheated emissions standards.

The newspaper cited reports by Bloomberg and the Associated Press saying Volkswagen’s deal, which is due to be filed in a federal court by Tuesday, includes payments of up to $7,000 to owners of vehicles affected by the scandal.

“The settlement has a provision to remove any VW diesel vehicle with a 2-liter engine that hasn’t been brought into compliance, said Elizabeth Cabraser, the court-appointed lead counsel for the plaintiff’s steering committee. Either they will have to be modified or VW will buy them back.” USA Today reports.

Read the article.

Every word matters in a contract and this is as true in Chinese as it is in any language, writes Dan Harris on Harris & Moure‘s China Law Blog.

“Words have very particularized meanings in contracts and those meanings are sometimes different in a contract than in real life. Contracts also have terms that have become recognized and defined over time,” he writes in the article. “The only people who can truly know how to use these specialized and particular words and terms are lawyers who know both China’s contract laws and who are completely fluent in written and spoken Chinese. On top of this, it is critical that the Chinese version explicitly reflect our client’s goals. To put it another way, we pretty much never see a ‘translated’ contract that works as intended.”

He explains the importance of having a judge or arbitrator being able to understand the Chinese language contract in the context of Chinese law.

Read the article.

The Supreme Court has ruled against Cuozzo Speed Technologies Corp. in its challenge to U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s procedures for canceling patents in a case involving a vehicle speedometer that tells drivers when they are speeding, reports Reuters.

The ruling is seen as a victory for technology companies like Apple and Google, which have used the procedures to invalidate patents they believed to be weak.

With the decision, the court validated a 2015 appeals court ruling upholding the USPTO’s invalidation of New Jersey-based Cuozzo’s speedometer patent. GPS device maker Garmin had challenged Cuozzo’s claims in that case, report Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung.

The legal question was whether the federal agency’s procedures have made it too easy to successfully cancel patents. In an opinion by Justice Stephen Breyer, the court backed the process.

Read the article.

Like many lawyers, Evan Kaine, a personal injury attorney in Atlanta, had seen the statistic about how 80 percent of all low-income Americans have unmet civil legal needs. To that end, he came up with the idea to set up shop in an area where most of those underrepresented people shop: local Wal-Mart stores, according to a report in the ABA Journal.

His firm, Kaine Law, has offices inside three Atlanta-area Wal-Marts. Kaine says that he opened his first Wal-Mart office in 2012 before expanding to two additional stores last year.

“Kaine says his offices are full-service, although he emphasizes that he has built up relationships with a number of other local firms that specialize in different areas of the law and often refers work to them,” says the report by Victor Li. “In fact, he estimates that he only keeps about 20 percent of the cases that come into the Wal-Mart offices. Kaine says the Wal-Mart offices operate on a fixed-fee basis and even offer a number of free services, including a basic last will and testament and notary public services.”

The article also describes another firm’s efforts in Missouri.

Read the article.

Kevin Perry and Joanne Elieli of of Cooley offer some insight for American general counsel on the drafting of international arbitration clauses, covering preliminary considerations and specific drafting issues.

The article is posted in the Cooley blog Cooley M&A.

The topics they discuss in the article include: consider likely nature of the dispute, should the clause cover all disputes that could arise?, should you include a dispute escalation clause? could any dispute include more than two parties? will there be any enforcement issues? choice of law issues (the contract and the arbitration), institutional or ad hoc arbitration, confidentiality, the rules to be used, the number of arbitrators, the seat/place of arbitration, and the language of the arbitration.

Read the article.

Practical Law and Honigman Miller Schwartz & Cohn LLP partners Ron Whitney, Todd Sable, and Lawrence Murphy will present a free 75-minute webinar on managing risk in supply agreements.

The event will be Thursday, June 23, beginning at 1 p.m. EDT.

During this session, the presenters will discuss: risks associated with supply agreements; tools counsel can use to assist clients in managing such risks; and tips for addressing, limiting, and resolving disputes. The discussion will also highlight some of the key differences between the U.S. and Canada when it comes to supply agreements. A brief Q&A session will follow.

Presenters:
Ron Whitney, Partner, Honigman Miller Schwartz & Cohn LLP
Todd Sable, Partner, Honigman Miller Schwartz & Cohn LLP
Lawrence Murphy, Partner, Honigman Miller Schwartz & Cohn LLP
Robert Ford, Associate Legal Editor, Practical Law Commercial Transactions (Moderator)
John Mackie, Senior Lawyer/Editor, Commercial Practice, Practical Law Canada

CLE credit is available for: Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington. CLE credit is being sought for: Minnesota, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia CLE credit can be self-applied for in: Florida.

The webinar also will be available on-demand.

Register for the webinar.

The Foundation of the International Association of Defense Counsel (IADC) has announced publication of its first “Survey of International Litigation Procedures: A Reference Guide” that offers an extensive overview of civil justice systems relevant to defendants throughout the world.

Developed through input from IADC members from around the globe, the reference guide provides overviews on the civil justice systems of 49 countries, including information about key aspects of litigation in each jurisdiction, including:

–Local methods of adjudication‎
–Alternative dispute resolution
–Discovery
–Trial procedure
–Experts
–Privilege
–Limitations
–Costs rules
–Jurisdiction
–Other topics of interest to potential litigants

“The IADC Foundation Survey of International Litigation Procedures Reference Guide is a useful tool for general counsel who want to know the key differences between U.S. and other civil justice systems and what to expect when managing litigation in a foreign jurisdiction,” said Gordon McKee, IADC Board member and a former member of the IADC Foundation Board, who was instrumental in creating the reference guide.

McKee, who also is a partner with Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, added that the reference guide is particularly noteworthy for its high-level overview and brevity in summarizing each country’s litigation procedures, processes and rules.

Publication of the Survey of International Litigation Procedures Reference Guide is an outcome of the IADC Foundation’s mission to educate the public and global legal community on issues impacting the civil justice system, provide a forum for discussion of topics critical to corporate and defense counsel, promote projects for the advancement of the legal system, and support scholarship for the continued education of defense attorneys and corporate counsel.

Download the reference guide.

About the International Association of Defense Counsel (IADC)
In a news release, the association said, “The International Association of Defense Counsel (IADC) is the preeminent invitation-only global legal organization for attorneys who represent corporate and insurance interests. Founded in 1920, the IADC’s members hail from five continents, 45 countries, and all 50 U.S. states. The core purposes of the IADC are to enhance the development of skills, promote professionalism, and facilitate camaraderie among its members, their clients, as well as the broader civil justice community.”

eSignLive by Vasco will present a complimentary webinar on the role authentication plays in digital transactions on Thursday, June 23, at 2 p.m. Eastern time.

Remote e-signature transactions are becoming the norm as mobile customers continue to demand service on their terms – anytime, anywhere, eSignLive says on its website. But how do you know exactly who you are transacting with? Authentication.

Authentication associates an e-signature to the person signing and ensures enforceability – so choosing the right user authentication method is important, the company says.

The session will include

• Authentication best practice and must-know tips
• Selecting the right authentication method
• Making it easy for customers
• 3rd party ID verification
• Mitigating risk

Register for the webinar.

Unlike most contractual disputes, it is not just merely the language used but also the circumstances in which the parties were contracting that will be determinative of whether direct claims are covered by the indemnity (and thus whether there will be reimbursement of legal fees), write Richard Levine, Peter Feist and Jessica Djilani in Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP’s Global Equity Watch.

The authors write that “even a winning litigant in the U.S. typically cannot recover its attorneys’ fees and expenses – a principle known as the ‘American Rule.’ Indemnification provisions typically reverse the American Rule by providing that the indemnified party can recover its attorneys’ fees and expenses from the indemnitor.  Thus, whether an indemnification provision applies to claims between the contracting parties – say for breach of a representation or warranty – is often heavily litigated.”

This article is the first in a series on the subject.

Read the article.

On June 17 the Austin Court of Appeals unanimously ruled in favor of Beck Redden‘s clients Statoil ASA and Fargo Acquisition, Inc., vacating a class certification order, the law firm reported.

The case, Brigham Exploration Co. et al. v. Boytim et al., involves Statoil’s 2011 acquisition of Brigham Exploration Company, the firm said in a release. Immediately following the announcement of the acquisition, a group of Brigham shareholders filed a purported class action, alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty against Brigham’s board of directors and aiding and abetting that breach against Statoil, Fargo, and Brigham.

Beck Redden represents Statoil and Fargo in the litigation, led by partner Fields Alexander and associate Chris Cowan, and handled the second appeal of the class certification order. Appellate briefs were filed by appellate partner Russell Post with the assistance of Cowan and associate Parth Gejji.

After hearing oral argument by Post and lawyers for the Brigham defendants, the appellate court vacated the class certification on the ground that the class was not sufficiently defined because it included numerous shareholders who lacked standing, according to the release.

The case has been remanded for further proceedings in the trial court.

Image by Ron Mader | Planeta

At the Big Law Business Summit last week, New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman ripped into Exxon Mobil for its stance on climate change, reports Bloomberg.

The report says Schneiderman accused Exxon of glossing over the risks that climate change poses to its core businesses in its public securities statements, and then couching its disclosure as first amendment protected.

“The first amendment doesn’t protect fraud – it doesn’t protect fraudulent speech,” he said.

Seventeen state attorneys general are investigating whether fossil fuel companies mislead investors in public disclosures about the risks associated with climate change.

Read the article.

FedEx Ground Package System Inc. has agreed to pay drivers in 20 states $240 million to settle lawsuits claiming the second-largest U.S. parcel delivery company misclassified them as independent contractors, it said on Thursday, according to a Reuters report.

Reporter Daniel Wiessner said Beth Ross, lead lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in an email that the settlement, if approved, would be divided among 12,000 drivers, some of whom would receive tens of thousands of dollars.

FedEx previously contracted directly with independent operators in an effort to save on taxes, fringe benefits, health care costs, pensions and other workers’ costs.

“The deal, subject to approval by a federal judge in Indiana where the cases were consolidated, would end nationwide litigation claiming that because drivers were required to use company-branded trucks, uniforms and scanners, FedEx was their employer under federal and state laws,” Reuters reports.

Read the article.

An article written by Raymond Patella and Michael Viscount of Fox Rothschild LLP outlines a handful of popular credit enhancements oil and gas companies may use to minimize their risk or exposure to a counterparty that they believe may be having financial difficulties.

“There are many different types of credit enhancements depending on the parties’ leverages, cash flow, size and risk. All of these factors should be considered to arrive at an enhancement best tailored to address the concerns of specific circumstances,” they explain.

The cover such topics as tighter payment terms, consignment, security interest, security deposit, credit insurance, guaranties, and setoff.

Read the article.

Construction contracts are often such voluminous documents that it can be difficult for owners to recognize and adequately negotiate the key terms that play the largest role in how construction risk and costs are allocated, writes Mike Madigan in Kegler, Brown, Hill + Ritter‘s Ohio Construction Law blog.

In the article, he considers 10 questions owners should ask themselves before signing a contract with a contractor for a commercial project.

A few of those questions are: Is there a consequential damages waiver? Is there a liquidated damages provision? Is the contractor required to provide a performance and payment bond? What costs are recoverable by the contractor under a termination for convenience?and has the contract been coordinated with the requirements of the lending institution?

Read the article.

U.S. District Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel, whom Donald Trump has publicly denounced as a “hater,” will decide whether to release videos of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s testifying in a lawsuit against Trump University, reports NBC News.

The videos Trump’s lawyers want to keep out of the public record are from Trump’s deposition late last year and early this year in a class-action lawsuit accusing him of fraud. They said there’s “no legitimate reason” for the plaintiffs to submit the videos, arguing that the only motive to submit the videos is to create “prejudice” against Trump.

“This is precisely the type of ‘prejudice’ our adversarial system demands,” the ex-students’ lawyers said, adding that Trump “may think anything that does not go his way is unfair, but that is clearly not the legal definition of unfair prejudice,” according to the report by NBC’s Alex Johnson.

Read the article.