Bloomberg Law takes a look at prospects for the U.S. Supreme Court if Hillary Clinton is elected president, considering that she may have have the opportunity to offer one or more nominations to seats on the court.

“A left-leaning court with at least one appointment from potential President Hillary Clinton would mean a big shift in areas of the law such as voting rights and gun control, but panelists making predictions at the American Bar Association annual meeting doubted the new court would overturn major precedents,” reports Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson.

She writes that professors on the panel believe the new court is unlikely to outright overrule some of the court’s more controversial precedents. But while the new court is unlikely to overrule precedent on cases involving voters’ rights, handgun regulation, and campaign finance, there still is plenty of room for a new majority to make substantive changes.

Read the article.

Gilead Sciences Inc. is entitled to receive the attorney fees it incurred related to hepatitis C patent litigation with drugmaker Merck & Co Inc., a U.S. district judge has ruled, reports Reuters.

“In June, Gilead was freed from paying up $200 million in damages for infringing two Merck patents related to Gilead’s blockbuster drugs Sovaldi and Harvoni, after a U.S. judge found a pattern of misconduct by Merck including lying under oath and other unethical practices,” writes Anya George Tharakan.

The court found that Giliead could receive relief from the cost of its legal fees in defending against the Merck challenge.

Read the story.

In late June, the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, reiterated that in a breach of contract case, lost revenue alone is typically an improper measure of damages, accordingn to a report from Roetzel & Andress.

Thomas P. Wert described the case: In HCA Health Services of Florida, Inc. v. CyberKnife Center of the Treasure Coast, LLC, 2016 WL 3540956 (Fla. 4th DCA, June 29, 2016), CyberKnife entered into a contract with a hospital. Under the contract, CyberKnife was to provide equipment and the site to the hospital for radiosurgery treatments to patients for five years. The hospital agreed to pay CyberKnife $5,150 plus sales tax “per click” for each treatment. The contract also provided that “in no event shall either party be entitled to consequential or punitive damages.”

Less than a year after the contract went into effect,  the hospital terminated the contract, citing federal regulations that would make “pay-per-click” agreements illegal beginning.

“Because CyberKnife failed to submit proof of lost profits at trial, it will collect nothing from the hospital even though the hospital terminated the contract almost two years before it actually could have under the contract,” Wert wrote.

Read the article.

Corporations seeking to avoid enforcement of foreign judgments they contend are based on corrupt proceedings may have a new weapon now, thanks to a ruling by a federal appeals court over Chevron’s long-running Ecuadorian pollution litigation, reports BloombergBusinessWeek.

The court affirmed that a lawyer for victims engaged in wrongdoing to secure a $9.5 billion verdict in the South American country.

“The decision hands well-heeled corporations a template for avoiding legal accountability anywhere in the world,” says Deepak Gupta, the lawyer representing Steven Donziger, the controversial New York attorney who has been battling Chevron over pollution liability in Ecuador for decades.

Paul Barrett explains that “the case began with pollution in oil fields operated by Texaco Inc. in the rain forests of Ecuador in the 1970s and 1980s. In 1993, Donziger and other U.S. lawyers sued Texaco in New York on behalf of villagers and indigenous tribe members. Chevron acquired Texaco and its potential liabilities in 2001. The pollution case was dismissed by U.S. courts and restarted in Ecuador in 2003.”

Read the article.

A Denver judge has fined one of the city’s prolific foreclosure attorneys $1.8 million for billing thousands of consumers facing the loss of their homes for title-insurance policies that did not exist, reports The Denver Post.

David Migoya writes that the Colorado Attorney General’s office argued in a seven-day trial in February had alleged in a February trial that Robert Hopp Jr., while working at his now-defunct law firm, billed customers fighting foreclosure for policies that were never issued. And Hopp inflated the cost of the few that were, the AG’s office claimed.

“The 37-page judgement handed down last week by Denver District Judge Shelley Gilman is the latest in a number of cases the state filed in 2013 against lawyers that specialized in foreclosures and allegedly padded their bills for costs that were ultimately borne by consumers losing their homes, the banks foreclosing on them and taxpayers whose federal insurance agencies covered the costs,” according to the report.

“Homeowners facing foreclosure had no choice but to pay the costs in order to stop the foreclosure process, and there was no process in place to challenge any of the fees lawyers said they were owed,” Migoya writes.

Read the article.

Wearable electronic monitoring devices have been long used to help monitor an individual’s health and fitness, writes Karen Turner for The Washington Post. “But now wearable use is becoming increasingly common in the workplace to record, analyze and enhance worker productivity, raising concerns among lawyers and labor specialists who feel that it’s a step toward stripping employees of workplace rights.”

She quoted from a recent study by customer management software company Salesforce showing that 86 percent of U.S. companies plan to invest more in wearable applications on the job this year. And 40 percent are considering using wearables to monitor employee time management and real-time employee communication.

But some labor lawyers are concerned about unintended legal consequences. For instance, some employees might not be meeting productivity standards due to a medical condition or disability. And employers could be sued simply because they have access to physical data about their employees.

Read the article.

A federal judge rejected PricewaterhouseCoopers’ bid to dismiss a $1 billion lawsuit accusing the accounting firm of professional malpractice for helping cause the October 2011 bankruptcy of brokerage MF Global Holdings Ltd., reports Reuters.

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero in Manhattan said there remained open questions concerning whether PwC’s alleged bad accounting advice was a substantial cause of MF Global’s rapid demise.

“PwC has not satisfied its burden of demonstrating the absence of any genuine issue of material fact,” Marrero wrote.

“PwC stands by its work for MF Global,” James Cusick, a lawyer for the firm, said in a statement. “MF Global’s collapse was caused by its own business decisions and adverse market events, not any accounting determination.”

Jonathan Stempel reports that MF Global sought Chapter 11 protection after investors grew anxious about a $6.3 billion investment in European sovereign debt, a large quarterly loss, credit rating downgrades, margin calls, and the use of customer funds to shore up liquidity.

Read the article.

Reuters is reporting that a federal appeals court rejected a one-time Florida billionaire’s bid to revive his $800 million lawsuit accusing Citigroup Inc. of fraudulently hiding its exposure to subprime and other toxic mortgages, inducing him to hold on to shares he otherwise would have sold.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said Citigroup and former officials, including two chief executives Charles Prince and Vikram Pandit, were not liable to trusts and corporate entities overseen by Arthur Williams and his wife, according to the report by Jonathan Stempel.

“Williams, the founder of what became Primerica Financial Services, has said he had planned in May 2007 to sell his 17.6 million Citigroup share stake, but decided to sell just 1 million because the bank assured investors it was in good shape,” the report says. but the assurance proved faulty, as the share price declined, with Williams saying he lost “the financial benefit” of his life’s work.

Read the article.

A federal judge has reprimanded Texarkana attorney and University of Arkansas System Trustee John Goodson, his law partner and three other lawyers for ethics violations and abuse of the court system, according to a report on Arkansas Online.

Chief U.S. District Judge P.K. Holmes III’s also included Goodson’s Texarkana partner Matt Keil, Jason Roselius of Oklahoma City, and Richard Norman and Martin Weber Jr. of Houston.

The judge had earlier accused Goodson and 16 other lawyers of forum-shopping a class-action lawsuit all were involved in, reports Lisa Hammersly.

The judge wrote in his order that the lawyers “engaged in improper mid-litigation forum shopping in a manner calculated to evade federal review and prevent the court from carrying out its obligation” to class members.

Read the article.

Owners who are dissatisfied with their contractors’ performance increasingly assert fraud-based claims in addition to breach of contract claims because fraud-based claims are not typically barred by contractual waivers and limits of liability, according to a client alert published by Pepper Hamilton.

“Fraud-based claims may also create the potential for punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages,” wrote the authors, Ralph A. Finizio, Robert A. Gallagher and Jane Fox Lehman. “Contractors and their counsel, however, can limit their potential exposure for fraud-based claims through careful contract drafting and thoughtful selection of the law to be applied to disputes.”

They wrote that contractors should first consider: the codified law of the jurisdiction where the project is to be built, statutes that regulate the availability of punitive damages, and differences in common law.

“Contractors should also keep in mind that their choice of law will likely impact the conduct and cost of any litigation, as well as the best choice of outside counsel to handle the matter,” they wrote.

Read the article.

A patent-holding company that won a huge court victory against Apple had its victory wiped out, and its stock plunged by more than 40 percent, reports Ars Technica.

Earlier this year, in a jury trial in East Texas, Nevada-based VirnetX won a verdict for $625.6 million against Apple. VirnetX alleged Apple infringed on four of its patents, which are said to cover Apple’s VPN on-demand feature, as well as FaceTime. But the federal judge who heard the trial has now vacated the verdict and ordered a new trial for September.

But the judge “said that the complex, consolidated trial, as well as repeated references to an earlier trial in which Apple was found to have infringed VirnetX patents, created ‘potential for juror confusion’ and unfairly prejudiced Apple,” according to the report by Joe Mullin. “The judge quoted a VirnetX attorney reciting an argument he viewed as potentially prejudicial.”

Read the article.

Form left: Jenny L. Martinez, Donald E. Godwin and Bruce W. Bowman Jr.

Texas trial lawyer Donald E. Godwin has announced that Bruce W. Bowman Jr. and Jenny L. Martinez have become name shareholders in the newly rebranded trial law firm, Godwin Bowman & Martinez, which has offices in Dallas and Houston.

“Bruce and Jenny have distinguished themselves as outstanding trial lawyers, and are highly regarded for their tireless efforts and dedication to excellence on behalf of our clients,” says Chairman and CEO Donald E. Godwin, a founding member of the firm in 1980. “We are proud to recognize Bruce and Jenny in the rebranding of our firm as we continue our unwavering commitment to the success of our clients.”

Bowman serves as the firm’s Executive vice president and general counsel. Martinez is executive vice president and secretary/treasurer. Together they co-chair the firm’s commercial litigation section.

Bowman represents plaintiffs and defendants in many areas of commercial litigation, including securities, trade secret litigation, trust and estate litigation and professional liability. In a news release, the firm said he played a significant role in the firm’s successful defense of Halliburton during the historic Deepwater Horizon/BP Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill litigation as a member of the firm’s trial team.  Having been board certified in civil trial law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization since 1978, he has been recognized for many years among the ranks of Texas Super Lawyers.  In addition, he is a longtime member of the prestigious American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA).

Martinez is a trial lawyer whose practice includes banking, trust and estate litigation, contracts, business torts, energy, and real estate.  A key member of the firm’s trial team in the successful defense of Halliburton in the landmark Deepwater Horizon/BP Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill litigation, she has been named multiple times to the list of Texas Super Lawyers, and to D Magazine’s list of the Best Lawyers in Dallas.

Apple Inc. has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to clear the way for the iPhone maker to secure hundreds of millions in damages from Samsung Electronics Co Ltd in a case over smartphone design patents, Reuters is reporting.

The feud over smartphone patents dates back to 2011, when Apple sued Samsung in a northern California court alleging infringement of the iPhone’s patents, designs and trademarked appearance.

“In its legal brief on Friday, Apple said Samsung had not provided evidence to support its argument that design patent damages should be decided on one component of a smartphone, rather than the entire product,” reports Dan Levine for Reuters. “Apple said there was no need for the Supreme Court to send the case back to a lower court for further proceedings.”

Samsung is facing a judgment of $548 million, of which $399 million involves design patents.

Read the article.

“While each crisis is unique, proper preparation can stabilize the situation and mitigate potential liability and damages,” the firm says. “A particular area of focus should be the preparation of an incident investigation report – when to prepare a report, who should prepare a report, how the report should be prepared and what may happen with the report in subsequent litigation.”

Watch the on-demand video.

A California appellate court closely parsed the language in an arbitration clause and reversed an order compelling arbitration of a dispute between a lawyer and his client-turned-business-partner, reports Karen Rubin in Thompson Hine’s blog, The Law for Lawyers Today.

She writes that the lawyer must now defend against a $1.5 million claim based on malpractice and breach of the operating agreement that he had drafted in connection with his real estate venture with the former client.

“Of course, it is no news that a case can turn on contract interpretation,” Rubin writes. “But this one emphasizes the small drafting choices that can send a case to a full-blown jury trial or keep it in arbitration.  That’s of special concern to lawyers and their clients at the front end of a relationship — pre-dispute agreements to arbitrate are increasingly included in retainer agreements.”

Read the article.

An article written by Deborah H. Share for Porzio, Bromberg & Newman‘s Employment Law Monthly reports that employers cannot contract with employees to reduce limitations periods for discrimination claims, according to a recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision.

According to the facts of the suit as presented to the court, a job applicant signed an application form that included language that appeared to waive any statute of limitation in the filing of a lawsuit against the employer. The language limited the applicant to a deadline of six months from the date of any alleged employment action that was the subject of a suit.

Share’s article detailed the court’s reasoning and listed and discussed three recommendations for employers to consider: remove such waivers from applications, shore up all processes related to employee terminations, and consider other useful tools for employers in this area.

Read the article.

A 20-year-old woman is being sued by a Houston law firm after she wrote negative reviews of the firm on Facebook and Yelp, according to a report in the Houston Chronicle.

Lan Cai, who had been injured in a serious auto accident, says the lawyers in the Law Offices of Tuan A. Khuu and Associates failed to work with her after she hired them, so she vented her frustration online which spurred the law firm to sue her.

According to the Chronicle, she posted on Facebook, “…they came to my house and into my room to talk to me when I was sleeping in my underwear. Seriously, it’s super unprofessional! After that I found someone else to switch to… I came in the office to meet with my previous attorney, but he literally ran off… So please DON’T waste your time…”

Keith Nguyen, an attorney with Tuan A. Khuu, said what Cai posted online isn’t true but wouldn’t explain what was false about it, reports Will Axford.

The firm is seeking $100,000 to $200,000 in damages, according to reports.

Read the article.

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher has posted an on-demand video discussing substantive litigation issues that tend to arise in a contentious bankruptcy, where many parties are fighting over a limited pool of assets — such as claims for breach of fiduciary duty, equitable subordination, and avoidance of fraudulent transfers, as well as litigation that arises in the context of plan confirmation.

The firm says the video covers some procedural tactics that have enabled parties to position themselves favorably among the various players in bankruptcy litigation.

“In light of the tumult in the junk bond market, the gyrations in the stock market, and other storm clouds on the global economic horizons, companies that face refinancing of their debt in 2016 and 2017 may find themselves restructuring through bankruptcy in Chapter 11,” the firm says on its website. “Creditors will face off for their respective piece of the restructured company, leading to specialized and fast-paced litigation.”

Watch the video.

The Dallas-based law firm Standly Hamilton, LLP, announces that personal injury attorney Stephen Blackburn has joined the firm.

Blackburn is a trial lawyer who focuses his practice on cases involving serious personal injuries, wrongful death and dangerous water contamination. He previously worked with the Baron & Budd law firm in Dallas.

Blackburn also has experience representing people and communities in environmental contamination claims, in addition to working on cases involving dangerous medical devices, pharmaceutical drugs and exposure to toxic chemicals and other dangerous products.

“I am very excited about continuing my work at Standly Hamilton by helping people who often are facing life-altering injuries that were caused by a corporation or someone else’s negligence,” says Blackburn. “Chris Hamilton and I have worked together over the years, and we both are looking forward to protecting our clients’ rights and growing the firm.”

A graduate of the University of Michigan Law School, Blackburn earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Florida. He is admitted to practice law in both Texas and California, including the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas and the Northern and Central Districts of California.

Blackburn is a member of the American Bar Association, American Association for Justice and the Public Justice Foundation.

Foley & Lardner LLP has announced  that Andrew Hurst has joined the firm’s Business Litigation & Dispute Resolution Practice as partner in the Washington, D.C. office. Hurst joins Foley with more than two decades of experience litigating matters related to civil fraud and white collar criminal defense.

Hurst represents life sciences companies, health care providers, government contractors and other corporations in civil fraud litigation, with a focus on False Claims Act (FCA) matters. Hurst also represents corporations and individuals in connection with criminal investigations and prosecutions by the Department of Justice and other federal and state entities. He has experience representing defendants and targets in a number of areas, including Medicare and Medicaid fraud, campaign finance, economic espionage, computer crimes and Independent Counsel investigations.

“Andrew’s experience effectively combines FCA and regulatory issues, providing a strong platform that our clients in the life sciences and health care industries will find very valuable,” said Michael Gay, chair of Foley’s Litigation Department.

In addition, Hurst has extensive experience serving as outside general counsel for a number of small and mid-size emerging companies.

“We are thrilled to have Andrew join the Foley team. He has an established litigation practice that will complement our Washington, D.C. office and national litigation department very well,” said Scott Fredericksen, managing partner of Foley’s Washington, D.C. office.

Prior to joining Foley, Hurst was at Reed Smith LLP.