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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Microsoft is facing two lawsuits seeking class-action status related to the company’s campaign to get people to use Windows 10, reports The Seattle Times.

A suit in U.S. District Court in Florida alleges Microsoft’s Windows 10 update prompts violated laws governing unsolicited electronic advertisements, as well as Federal Trade Commission prohibitions on deceptive and unfair practices. And a suit filed earlier in Israel, also seeking class-action status, alleges Windows 10 installed on Windows users’ computers without their consent, in violation of Israeli law.

“The lawsuits follow complaints from Windows users and longtime Microsoft watchers for what some said were pushy or deceptive prompts to update to Windows 10,” writes The Times‘ Matt Day.

Read the article.

A Fort Worth attorney who helped represent residents of Johnson, Tarrant and Dallas counties in a lawsuit against Chesapeake Energy and Total E&P USA is suing his co-counsel for a third of the legal fees from the nearly $53 million settlement, reports The Dallas Morning News.

Jim Ward of Wardlaw Services accuses Dan McDonald and his Fort Worth firm of breaching a 2014 agreement on how settlement proceeds would be handled and ignoring his contribution to the winning case.

“Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake and Total, an American subsidiary of a French firm, agreed in May to settle claims that they underpaid royalties to 13,000 plaintiffs in the Barnett Shale,” reports Austin Huguelet.

Huguelet explains: “In his lawsuit, Ward claims that while McDonald received ‘the recognition and spotlight’ as lead counsel in the case, the Wardlaw team spent two years assembling the research that served as a ‘blueprint for victory.'”

Read the article.

A.M. Best and Best’s Directories of Insurance Professionals will host a webinar to explore the legal and insurance issues surrounding lead injuries.

The one-hour complimentary event will begin at 2 p.m. EDT on Wednesday, August 3.

Lead was once used in a variety of construction materials, especially paint. Lead poisoning can be disastrous, if not deadly, the company says on its website. A panel of legal and insurance professionals will discuss the sources of lead injury claims, developing liability issues and the industry impact of lead-based claims.

Panelists include:

• Phil Pizzuto, partner; Lindabury, McCormick, Estabrook & Cooper, P.C.;
• Eileen Buholtz, attorney/firm member; Connors, Corcoran & Buholtz, PLLC;
• Brian Hinton, attorney; Anderson Crawley & Burke, pllc; and
• Ken Gillespie, litigation specialist; Builders Mutual Insurance Company.

Best’s Directories’ Managing Editor John Czuba will moderate the discussion.

Register for the webinar.

The international furor over the online game Pokémon Go has sent countless children and adults scurrying through neighborhoods, parks and unfamiliar areas in pursuit of virtual game characters found only online.

While Pokémon Go is being credited for encouraging more public conversation and promoting regular physical exercise, Dallas attorney Rogge Dunn says there are many ways that a Pokémon pursuit can land a player at the courthouse or, worse, the jailhouse. Although Pokémon Go manufacturer Nintendo requires players to accept terms of service that prevent them from taking the company to court unless they send an opt-out notice, he says there are no such free passes for those who play the game.

In a blog post, Androvett Legal Media and Marketing quotes Dunn:

“While Pokémon Go may blur the line between fantasy and reality, there are real legal consequences if you step outside the law as a player,” Dunn says. “If you park your car in the street, expect a parking ticket. If you’re trespassing on someone’s property, expect to get arrested. If you cause a wreck while speeding toward a popular Pokémon location, you better be prepared for jail.”

An adjunct professor in Southern Methodist University’s MBA program, Dunn notes one case from his classroom where a radio station promotion was blamed for causing a serious car crash after urging listeners to show up at a particular location. The same scenario played out in Fort Worth roughly 20 years ago when a disc jockey at a country radio station claimed he’d used $5 and $10 bills as bookmarks in the fiction section at the public library. News reports detailed how people overran the library in search of the money, damaging thousands of books in the process.

“A lot of adults are being very smart about playing Pokémon Go with their children so they can make sure everyone is safe. But there are just as many instances where kids and grown-ups alike are going into unsafe areas or entering strangers’ properties,” says Dunn. “Particularly in states like ours where a lot of people have guns in their homes, I fear that a Pokémon Go player may end up being shot or killed before a homeowner realizes that they’re simply playing a video game. If that happens, you can expect both our criminal courts and civil courts will get involved.”

Article source

Bloomberg BNA’s Big Law Business, in partnership with Catalyst, will present a complimentary live event, “Taking Control of Corporate Discovery: What It Means for Outside Counsel,” Thursday, July 21, in New York. The event will be 3-7 p.m. EDT, at Bloomberg LP, 731 Lexington Ave., New York, NY.

This free event will explore the changing nature of the in-house and outside counsel relationship, given ever-tightening corporate budgets and new approaches to discovery.

Sessions will address:

• Best practices on managing costs in complex cases by leveraging technology
• An overview of the latest analytical tools to aid in discovery
• How the recently amended Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will affect eDiscovery

Register for the event.

A New York magistrate judge has found that a plaintiff’s request for individual defendants to search for and produce certain documents from their personal computers and email accounts was not “unduly intrusive or burdensome” because the request was limited in time frame and the parties had agreed to search terms, and granted the plaintiff’s motion to compel, according to a report by Doug Austin on eDiscoverydaily.

The magistrate judge noted that “to the extent such documents exist on the Individual Defendants’ personal computers, they may contain information going to bias or motivation which may show why a personal computer was used for such communications, including information which may support Plaintiff’s claims of deliberate indifference against the Individual Defendants.”

The case involved a transgender prison inmate who sued the defendants claiming they acted “with deliberate indifference” to serious medical needs by denying hormone therapy for gender dysphoria.

Read the article.

Chesapeake Energy will pay about $51 million to wipe out hundreds of lawsuits accusing the Oklahoma City energy giant of cheating North Texas property owners out of millions of dollars in natural gas royalties, according to a report in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Max B. Baker reports that the law firm representing the property owners said 91 percent of their 13,000 clients — representing 97.15 percent of the natural gas production — agreed to accept the out-of-court settlement.

“The lawsuits alleged that Chesapeake deducted higher-than-necessary postproduction costs from royalty checks,” Baker reports. “They contended that the company used sham sales to affiliates to transport and market the natural gas to increase what it earned.”

Read the article.

The Federal Trade Commission has determined that Herbalife is not a pyramid scheme, but the nutritional supplement marketer will still be required to pay $200 million to consumers and “fully restructure” its “unfair” business in a comprehensive settlement, the federal regulator said Friday, according to a report by USA Today.

“The settlement caps a two-year investigation by the FTC, which probed Herbalife over accusations that the company’s main focuses less on retail sales of products than on on bringing in increasing numbers of new sales people who were deceived into believing they could reap substantial profits by selling diet, nutritional supplement and personal care products,” report Nathan Bomey and Kevin McCoy.

Under the settlement, Herbalife must “fundamentally restructure its business, so that participants are rewarded for what they sell, not how many people the recruit,” FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez said in a statement.

Read the article.

Reuters is reporting that the U.S. Department of Justice has begun a rare internal examination of what went wrong in the prosecution of a controversial drug conspiracy case against delivery service Federal Express, according to the department’s top prosecutor in San Francisco.

“The review plays into a broader debate about how the government prosecutes suspected corporate wrongdoing and could influence its approach to such cases in the future,” write Dan Levine and David Ingram.

FedEx was indicted in 2014 on charges the company had knowingly helped Internet pharmacies ship illegal pills. Then, four days into a trial in San Francisco last month, the DOJ dropped all charges, a decision the judge praised, saying it was clear FedEx was “factually innocent.”

The new review will examine why prosecutors brought the case, what oversight supervisors provided and what role officials in Washington D.C. played.

Read the article.

With the recent passage of the Defense of Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), businesses are welcoming the many benefits the statute brings, including federal jurisdiction, robust equitable relief, and the ability to recover compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees, according to a report by Fisher & Phillips LLP.

The article points out that many employers may overlook a requirement that requires revisions to existing confidentiality agreements and restrictive covenants.

“Namely, employers are required to provide employees with notice that they are entitled to immunity if they disclose a trade secret for the purpose of reporting suspected illegal conduct,” writes Michael R. Greco. “If employers fail to give notice in the manner required by the DTSA, they will not be able to recover punitive damages or attorneys’ fees. Consequently, employers must pay careful attention to the DTSA notification requirements, which are not as straightforward as many believe.”

Read the article.

Texas Lawyer’s annual listing of the top verdicts in Texas includes last year’s trial win by Dallas-based Rose•Walker for firm client ThermoTek Inc. as one of the state’s top contract verdicts.

In November of last year, Judge Sidney Fitzwater of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Dallas entered a judgment of $9.6 million for medical products manufacturer ThermoTek. The judgment followed a unanimous verdict in which jurors agreed with Rose•Walker’s argument that a competitor fraudulently obtained ThermoTek’s business information for a series of physical therapy machines.

“We’re always happy to walk out of court with a win on behalf of our clients,” says firm founder Marty Rose, who represented ThermoTek at trial along with firm partner Chris McDowell. “But to have our work recognized among other top trial wins is a special honor.”

Read the article.