Image by Mike Mozart

Reuters is reporting that Bayer AG plans to argue that a $2 billion jury award and thousands of U.S. lawsuits claiming its glyphosate-based weed killer Roundup causes cancer should be tossed because a U.S. regulatory “agency said the herbicide is not a public health risk.

“Some legal experts believe Bayer will have a tough time convincing appellate courts to throw out verdicts and lawsuits on those grounds,” writes Reuters’ Tina Bellon. “Bayer has a better shot if a business-friendly U.S. Supreme Court takes up the case, experts said. But that could take years.”

Bayer acquired Monsanto, the manufacturer of Roundup, last year, and the litigation involving 13,400 plaintiffs went along with the deal. The plaintiffs allege the product causes cancer. So far, three consecutive U.S. juries have found the product to be carcinogenic, resulting in verdicts amounting to billions of dollars.

Read the Reuters article.

Judge Amit P. Mehta

A federal judge expressed astonishment Tuesday at arguments raised by President Trump’s lawyers seeking to block his accounting firm from turning over years of financial records to the House Oversight and Reform Committee and seemed to signal a swift ruling in favor of lawmakers, reports The Washington Post.

“U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta fired pointed questions at the president’s lawyers, who argued in an April 22 lawsuit that the committee’s sweeping subpoena to Mazars USA for the financial records of Trump and various associated entities since 2011 was not ‘a valid exercise of legislative power,’” writes the Post‘s Spencer S. Hsu.

A lawyer representing Trump accused Democrats of “assuming the powers of the Department of Justice” on a partisan crusade.

Read the Post article.

Attorneys argued for more than three hours Tuesday over whether a judge should approve the $2.2 billion settlement of a class-action lawsuit over SCE&G’s failed nuclear plant construction project and the nine electric rate hikes that paid for it, reports the Durham Herald Sun.

The main point of contention was whether the 13 law firms that fought SCE&G for months before negotiating the settlement should earn $64 million in fees — money that could otherwise add to the cash refunds and rate credits going to the Cayce-based utility’s customers, writes the herald Sun‘s Avery G. Wilks.

A lawyer for the 13 law firms told the judge they took a tremendous risk in suing SCE&G. Facing long odds and high-powered defense lawyers, they spent 15 months, 26,000 hours and $865,000 building their case with star witnesses and crucial documents, he said.

Read the Herald Sun article.

A recent Texas ruling illustrates the problems that can arise when parties to a joint operating agreement elect to have a non-owner serve as the operator, points out Austin Brister in the McGinnis Lochridge Oil and Gas Law Digest.

The court was called on to determine whether an elected unit operator is permitted to delegate operatorship duties to a contract operator, and whether that contract operator can be liable to nonoperators for breach of any duties imposed on the operator under that unit operating agreement.

PBJV was designated as unit operator, but then PBJV entered into a contract with Apache to perform a number of duties.

The court concluded that Apache was merely delegated duties, based on its observations that PBJV never actually named or designated Apache as the “Unit Operator,” but instead entered into a “Contract Services Agreement” and power of attorney with Apache under which PBJV contractually delegated certain operator duties to Apache.

Read the article.

Reuters is reporting that a group of U.S. state attorneys general are investigating Expedia Group and hotel chains like Hyatt Hotels Corp and Marriott International Inc for alleged violations of antitrust law in online travel booking, according to a court filing.

“The filing in a state court in Utah relates to a dispute originally filed in Texas in which Travelpass accused the hotel chains last year of agreeing with each other, and with online travel groups like Expedia, to not advertise to consumers who searched for another company’s hotel,” according to the report.

Court documents name the hotel chains Hyatt, Marriott, Caesars Entertainment Corp and Choice Hotels International Inc.

Read the Reuters article.

Bloomberg Law reports that two women among a group of female associates accusing Morrison & Foerster LLP of pregnancy discrimination must replead some or all of their claims, a federal judge ruled.

One of the plaintiffs was too late with her claims under federal and District of Columbia law, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California said. And another plaintiff’s allegations were insufficient to support her argument that a release she signed was unduly influenced by the dire economic situation caused by her termination, the court said.

The women are part of a proposed nationwide class action filed in April 2018.

Read the Bloomberg Law article.

A federal judge on Tuesday ordered Pacific Gas and Electric Co.’s board to tour the Butte County community where the company’s equipment is suspected of starting a historically devastating California wildfire last year.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that “U.S. District Judge William Alsup made the decision at a sentencing hearing he held for the utility regarding a violation of its probation arising from the 2010 San Bruno pipeline explosion. Alsup previously found the utility did not properly report a settlement it reached over a small 2017 fire.”

Alsup said he wanted the energy company executives to “see the gravity of what happened up there” and indicated he likely will join the tour.

Read the SF Chronicle article.

The former general counsel of ExlService Holdings says in a lawsuit that she suffered from gender stereotyping in her job, illustrated by an order from the CEO that she serve cake to the company’s junior male employees at a company anniversary.

The Washington Post reports on the complaint, which says the CEO at that anniversary event singled out then-GC Nancy Saltzman as one of the “ladies” in the room, despite the fact that she was the most senior female executive at the company. The complaint says Saltzman was humiliated.

The complaint says the event was an example of gender stereotyping. The Post‘s Deanna Paul writes: “According to the complaint, [the CEO] ‘took steps to exclude her from career and advancement opportunities, subjected her to enhanced scrutiny, and micromanaged her’ in a manner her male equals were not.”

She complained to other executives about stereotyping, but she later was fired.

Read the Washington Post article.

The trial involving Hurricane Harvey-related claims from Houston-area property owners who were flooded by the water release from two U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reservoirs will begin on May 6, according to a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing.

“We’re pleased that we can finally present the evidence to claim fair compensation for the residents whose property was flooded because of the government’s failures,” said Daniel Charest of Burns Charest LLP, co-lead counsel for the residents. “The Corps of Engineers knew its reservoirs and management plans would result in the flooding of private property, which is exactly what happened in August 2017.”

An estimated 8,000 to 10,000 homes and businesses flooded near government-run dams to the west of Houston. The plaintiffs allege the actions of the Corps of Engineers and its design of the reservoirs led to the flooding of their private property, resulting in an unlawful “taking” of land under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The Addicks and Barker reservoirs were built in the 1940s and 1950s. Over the years, the government allowed developers to build thousands of homes and businesses on land that the Corps knew was at risk of flooding, according to plaintiffs. During Harvey’s rains, some of these properties flooded from reservoir overflow, and others flooded when the Corps chose to release water to protect the dams.

The two-week bench trial is before the Court of Federal Claims but will take place in the federal courthouse in downtown Houston.

Facing an onslaught of lawsuits and a criminal investigation, Boeing announced the appointment of a newly created czar to oversee all legal matters arising from two deadly crashes of 737 MAX jetliners, reports The Seattle Times.

J. Michael Luttig, 64, a former federal appeals court judge who has served as Boeing’s general counsel since 2006, is now the new counselor and senior adviser to Boeing Chairman and CEO Dennis Muilenburg and the company’s board of directors, according to the Times Steve Miletich.

Dozens of lawsuits seeking monetary damages have been filed against Boeing in U.S. courts, alleging negligence on the part of the company. Statements indicate Boeing plans to take an aggressive stance in responding to civil allegations and any potential criminal accusations.

Read the Seattle Times article.

Bloomberg Law reports that a lawyer and his client didn’t pay more than $1 million in sanctions imposed by an Illinois judge for filing a “frivolous” lawsuit they’re appealing, prompting the judge to approve a bond to pay the sanctions that must be posted no later than May 9.

Bloomberg’s Stephen Joyce writes that Judge Margaret Ann Brennan imposed sanctions totaling $1,061,623 against Marshall Spiegel and his lawyer, John Xydakis, in a case involving a condominium association. Spiegel and Xydakis had engaged in harassing behavior, the judge found.

Two adverse decisions and a November 2015 notice that their claim against  condo board member was not well grounded didn’t Spiegel and Xydakis from producing more filings and launching new lawsuits.

Read the Bloomberg Law article.

Bloomberg Law reports that the former chair of Dentons government contracts practice group claims that the firm owes her more than $390,000, but the firm has fired back, saying she owes the firm almost $2 million in client fees.

Jessica Abrahams, now at Drinker Biddle & Reath, claims Dentons breached a contract that guaranteed she’d have the funds in her capital account returned to her if she left the firm.

Dentons responded in a statement that when Abrahams left, “Dentons was owed more than $1.8 million from her clients and those fees and costs largely remain outstanding today.”

Read the Bloomberg Law article.

The Florida Bar hit Fort Lauderdale lawyer Ashley Krapacs with an emergency suspension for alleged behavior including “terrorist legal tactics” and “cyberstalking restraining order” in online posts about two peers.

The Miami Herald reports that the case started with Krapacs filing for a restraining order against a man whom she claimed was violently abusive during their relationship. The Bar presented an example from Krapacs’ LinkedIn account that referred to one of the lawyers on the other side:

“Old White Male Attorney #2 steps up to the plate to harass a domestic violence victim with yet another baseless legal treat. Classy.”

She also accused the court of being biased, according to the Herald‘s David J. Neal.

Read the Miami Herald article.

A Miami-based personal injury attorney, a prostate cancer survivor, sued his health-care insurance provider in April, accusing it of wrongfully denying him and potentially thousands of other men coverage for a lifesaving prostate cancer treatment.

Richard Cole has had a hard time finding a judge to hear his case, if only because they all keep recusing themselves, reports The Washington Post.

Then one judge, who also felt he had to recuse himself and who was a prostate cancer survivor himself, made it clear how he felt about the case. In his recusal order, U.S. District Judge Robert N. Scola Jr. wrote “To deny a patient this treatment, if it is available, is immoral and barbaric.”

Read the Post article.

Lex Machina will present a present a webinar on the company’s latest research on contracts litigation.

The 30-minute event will begin at 10 a.m. PDT (1 p.m. EDT) on Tuesday, May 7, 2019.

Lex Machine legal data expert Karen Chadwick, the author of the report, and Abena Mainoo, partner at Cleary Gottlieb, will discuss the latest findings and trends on top law firm and party data, timing metrics, case resolutions, damages awards, and more.

The webcast will cover:

• Case Filings
• Case Timing to Key Milestones
• Top Districts and Judges
• Most Active Parties
• Top Law Firms
• Case Resolutions and Findings
• Damages Awards

Register for the webinar.

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery ruling is a stark reminder that courts will enforce the terms of a merger agreement as written, and that the failure to comply with seemingly ministerial formalities can have severe consequences, according to a post on the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation.

The authors, partners at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, discuss Vintage Rodeo Parent, LLC v. Rent-A-Center, Inc., which involves a proposed merger. The agreement included a prescribed “end date,” means for extensions, and a reverse termination fee of $126.5 million.

The article expands on key takeways from the ruling, including the need for struct compliance with notice provisions, the lack of implied duty to warn a counterparty of its mistake, the discoverability of text messages, and enforceability of reverse termination fees.

Read the article.

The vice president of legal affairs & litigation counsel of Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton Inc. sued her employer, claiming executives shrugged off her complaints of sexual harassment as “a byproduct of being an attractive woman who works at a company with a French culture.”

The New York Post reports that plaintiff Andowah Newton claims her harasser — a “senior level management employee” whom she doesn’t name — frequently ogled her and once said, “You are so pretty. And that beautiful smile, I just can’t get enough of it.” He also made unwanted physical contact with her, she said.

The company’s response to her initial complaints is laughable, court documents say, because “none of the individual actors in this matter is, in fact, French.”

Read the New York Post article.

Hanzo and Duane Morris, LLP will present a joint webinar, “The Impact of Meritless Claims on Multidistrict Litigation And How Social Media Investigations Can Help,” on May 16, 2019 at 1 pm ET. The event will include a discussion about multidistrict litigation, the challenge of meritless claims, and strategic insights about how social media investigations can help.

Multidistrict litigation (MDL), came into being in 1968 with the intent to make it more efficient for parties to litigate complex cases where there is a common question of fact that are pending in different districts. Since then, MDLs have surged to more than 50 percent of all federal civil cases, of which product liability cases now comprise the vast majority of MDLs. Aside from being great for plaintiff’s counsel, however, it’s questionable whether they are good for anyone else, Hanzo says in a news release.

“Unfortunately, what was originally intended to streamline processes has turned into a magnet for meritless claims, where around a third of the MDL claims turn out to be unsupportable. Adding to the injury, these are often discovered at the settlement stage,” according to Hanzo.

In this webinar, industry leaders Sean Burke, partner, and Ryan O’Neil, both of Duane Morris, and Evan Gumz of Hanzo will discuss the problem meritless claims pose to the multidistrict litigation process and explore proactive solutions to help identify frivolous claims early in the process.

The discussion will include:

– The prevalence of meritless claims and their impact on the MDLs
– The problem with discovering meritless claims at the settlement stage
– Legal reform and possible solutions proposed by the subcommittee of the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules
– Bellwether trials
– How social media investigations can help

Speakers

– Sean Burke, Partner, Duane Morris, LLP
– Ryan O’Neil, Associate, Duane Morris, LLP
– Evan Gumz, Senior Account Executive, EDiscovery, Hanzo

Register for the webinar.

Bloomberg Law reports that an importer-exporter who says two former partners and their attorneys at McGuireWoods LLP used dirty tricks to strip their joint venture of its assets has accused the law firm of sitting on the records he needs to prove it.

The complaint claims McGuireWoods won’t give Andrew J.C. Kunian any of the legal work it did setting up a deal to export natural gas from Texas to Chile on behalf of two companies he co-owned with Francis Smollon and Colin Williams.

Bloomberg’s Mike Leonard writes: “According to the Delaware complaint, Smollon and Williams ‘orchestrated Kunian’s freeze-out with the full knowledge, cooperation, substantial aid, and assistance of’ McGuireWoods.”

Read the Bloomberg Law article.

The 5th U.S Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a 2016 jury verdict and 2017 trial court judgment that ultimately awarded $9.5 million to a Dallas-based health care company, according to a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing.

In a majority opinion, the appellate court found that BlueCross BlueShield of Louisiana failed to properly reimburse Encompass Office Solutions for in-office medical procedures, and distributed a defamatory letter to physicians with false information regarding the company and its services. That letter threatened to terminate the network contracts of doctors who continued to work with Encompass.

Subsequent to the opinion in the case, the court has denied a motion for rehearing.

A trial team from Thompson & Knight LLP represented Encompass throughout the district court hearings and before the 5th Circuit.

“This case has a lengthy history spanning several years, and we’re pleased that finally Encompass will be properly compensated for the services it provided and the damages the company has incurred,” said Jennifer Rudenick Ecklund, a trial partner at Thompson & Knight who argued the case before the trial court and 5th Circuit. The judgment remains subject to the awarding of interest and legal fees to Encompass.

Other members of the Thompson & Knight trial team included William L. Banowsky, Andrew C. Cookingham, Greg W. Curry, Richard B. Phillips, Jr. and Reed Randel.

Encompass provides mobile ambulatory surgery services that allow doctors to safely perform surgeries in their offices. Encompass’s business is primarily focused on women’s health, allowing patients to have sensitive gynecological procedures done in the comfort and safety of the doctor’s offices while providing the necessary anesthesia care. This method reduces the infection risks associated with hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers, and provides both doctors and patients with a more efficient and cost-effective means of delivering medically necessary surgical care.