One of the founders of futuristic transportation start-up Hyperloop One has filed a wrongful termination suit against his former co-founder, alleging nepotism and harassment, CNN is reporting.

The company is competing to build a Hyperloop transportation system to transport people and cargo up to 760 mph in a partially pressurized tube.

“On the outside, Hyperloop One appeared to be leading the competition with plans to have a working Hyperloop by 2020.” report Heather Kelly & Laurie Segall. “Inside, the startup was apparently being torn apart by mismanagement and growing tensions between leaders, according to the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on July 12.”

Plaintiffs allege the current leaders of the company gave  lucrative jobs and raises to relatives and, and in one case, a girlfriend, pocketed money themselves and harassed other employees.

Read the article.

U.S. securities regulators have accused a KPMG partner and two other individuals of insider trading on tips about three pending corporate mergers on which the accounting firm was providing advice, Reuters is reporting.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed the suit in federal court in Atlanta, claiming KPMG tax partner Thomas Avent of passed tips to his stockbroker, Raymond Pirrello, writes Nate Raymond. The SEC says Pirrello told a friend, Lawrence Penna, who with his family made more than $111,000 trading on the information.

The report says KPMG said on Friday that it was “deeply troubled” by the allegations and had placed Avent, a 63-year-old Atlanta resident, on administrative leave.

Read the article.

A supposedly rogue investigation that Uber originally claimed it knew nothing about — and which could turn out to be a costly embarrassment for the ride-hailing giant — began with a 10-word request from the company’s general counsel, reports Matthew Flamm in Crain’s New York Business.

By email in 2015, Uber GC Salle Yoo asked the company’s security chief, “Could we find out a little more about this plaintiff?”

The Uber email, along with some others, eventually led to involvement by global intelligence firm Ergo, court records reveal.

“They were entered in support of a motion for relief brought by Connecticut conservationist Spencer Meyer—the mysterious plaintiff about whom Yoo inquired immediately after Meyer filed an antitrust class-action suit charging Uber Chief Executive Travis Kalanick with price fixing,” Flamm reports. The plaintiff claims the Ergo investigator used a ruse to snoop on him on his lawyer.

Read the article.

Considerable litigation has arisen as to whether a  waiver of subrogation provision in a construction contract applies to bar an insurer’s subrogation claim against a contractor to the extent the insurer covered damage to the owner’s “non-work” property under the owner’s existing property policy, writes Robert Barrack in Robinson Cole’s Construction Law Zone blog.

He explains that a majority of jurisdictions have held that the waiver of subrogation provision in the construction contract applies to bar subrogation claims where the owner’s property policy covers the damage to “non-work” property.

In his article, he explains waiver of subrogation provisions and discusses some cases that address the subject.

Read the article.

Forty three long and painful years have passed since Víctor Jara, the famous Chilean folk singer whom Rolling Stone Magazine called one of the top 15 protest artists of all time, was found dead covered with dozens of bullet wounds in the brutal Pinochet military coup that upended his country.

A Florida jury found Florida resident Pedro Pablo Barrientos Nunez liable for the torture and murder of Jara, and the court ordered Barrientos to pay $28 million in damages – $8 million in compensatory damages and $20 million in punitive damages.

Richard S. Dellinger with Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A. in Orlando served as the local counsel and worked closely with The Center for Justice and Accountability, a San Francisco-based legal advocacy group, and the New York law firm Chadbourne & Parke, LLP to represent the Jara family.

“This is justice at its best,” said Dellinger who worked tirelessly with the legal team in the eight-day trial. “Mr. Barrientos received a fair trial process that Mr. Jara never received. I am proud of what we were able to give the Jara family, who never lost sight of what happened 43 years ago and fought hard to hold Jara’s killer to account. I hope that this week’s verdict provides some measure of justice and renewal for the Jara family,” added Dellinger.

In a release, the firm said:

Joan Jara, Victor Jara’s 88-year old widow, attended the trial and said, “It has been a long journey seeking justice for Victor’s death. His songs continue to be sung today, and inspire both artists and those who seek social justice. For Victor, art and social justice were one and the same. Today, there is some justice for Victor’s death, and for the thousands of families in Chile who have sought truth.”

The legal team filed a civil suit on September 4, 2013 before the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida against Barrientos on behalf of Jara’s widow, Joan Jara, and children, Amanda Jara Turner and Manuela Bunster. The complaint alleged that Barrientos was responsible for the torture and execution of Jara, who was also a theater director and activist inspired by artists such as Bruce Springsteen, Bono, Joan Baez, Holly Near, Arlo Guthrie, Peter, Paul & Mary, and The Clash. A professor of theater in Santiago in 1973, Jara was one of thousands of intellectuals, political leaders and perceived political supporters of the Allende government detained en masse at Chile Stadium during the early days of the military coup led by General Augusto Pinochet.

The former officer, Barrientos, who is now 65 years old, moved to Central Florida at the end of the Pinochet dictatorship in 1990. His whereabouts were unknown until mid-2012, when a Chilean television crew located him in Florida. He worked as a landscaper and then a cook. Over the past several years, Barrientos worked at Perkins Restaurant in Deltona. Barrientos told the court that he came to the United States to earn money for his family. He did not report his military past when he applied for citizenship in 2010.

“I find it unnerving that the former Pinochet Lieutenant who is responsible for the torture and murder of Victor Jara and others at the Chile Stadium was living right here in Deltona,” said Dellinger. “This is a person who could have been one of our neighbors.”

Throughout the trial, the plaintiffs called many eyewitnesses to the stand, including ex-military conscripts assigned to the Chile Stadium detention center who placed Barrientos at the scene of Victor’s death. One conscript testified that Barrientos repeatedly boasted that he killed Jara. Additional testimonies came from others who were incarcerated in Chile Stadium with Jara, who witnessed the brutality levied against him by the Pinochet regime.

Jara’s torture and death has become a world-wide symbol for the suffering of all the innocent people who were detained, tortured, and killed at Chile Stadium, many of whom have yet to be identified.

Veteran trial lawyer James Edward “Jim” Maloney has opened a solo practice in Houston, at The Esperson Buildings, 815 Walker St., Suite 1150.

Educated at Yale and a graduate of the Harvard Law School, he began his career at Baker Botts where he spent the next 35 years representing leading business executives and major corporations, with a client list that has included:

• Shell Oil Company
• Pennzoil-Quaker State
• Reliant Energy and its predecessors
• Match.com
• Novartis
• Lyondell Chemical Company
• Southern Pacific Railroad Company
• Ford Motor Company
• Bridgestone-Firestone
• T. Boone Pickens

When he left Baker Botts in 2012, Maloney had headed the firm’s securities litigation section and had also served as the longtime chair of the firm’s employment committee.

More recently, he was a partner at Andrews Kurth. There, his clients included a major international oil and gas exploration company and a number of special and conflicts committees of boards of directors at public companies and master limited partnerships. He has been involved in securities litigation work, corporate takeover disputes, corporate investigations, class actions and complex commercial disputes in both state and federal courts.

Over more than 40 years of practice, Maloney has tried more than 100 cases to jury and bench verdicts and managed thousands of others to successful resolution, he said in a release.

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.

Conservative hopes for a transformational term at the Supreme Court ended with Justice Antonin Scalia’s death this winter, and liberals instead prevailed on what are likely to be the term’s most influential decisions, reports Robert Barnes of The Washington Post.

The most high-profile cases, including affirmative action, abortion restrictions, labor union fees, gerrymandering and the use of executive power, ended either with liberal victories or draws that set no precedent.

Barnes wrote that “it was the absence of Scalia, the bombastic senior justice whose intellect and bravado powered the court’s conservative wing, that altered the court’s tone and reversed its reputation as a welcoming place for conservative causes.”

“Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. took on Scalia’s role as dissenter, airing from the bench his disagreements with the majority on abortion and affirmative action,” the article continues. “But unlike Scalia, he lacks a love of the whip.”

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.

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.

Photo by Marc Nozell

A conservative watchdog group was temporarily blocked on Tuesday from interviewing former State Department officials under oath in what would have been the third lawsuit over Hillary Clinton’s emails to progress to that stage, The Hill is reporting.

The ruling delays Judicial Watch’s effort to interview officials as part of an open records lawsuit related to Clinton’s use of a private server for her personal email account when she was secretary of State. The judge told Judicial Watch to finish interviews in two other ongoing cases first.

“To avoid duplicative discovery and unnecessary expenditure of public funds, the court will stay this case pending the completion of discovery in those other cases,” Walton ordered.

“The ruling gives some relief to the State Department and Clinton, which have both been the subject of intense scrutiny over the bespoke email setup that the former secretary of State used throughout her time in the Obama administration,” wrote Julian Hattem.

Read the article.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

When negotiating and drafting a contract on behalf of a business, one of the most important considerations is whether it will create personal liability for the individual signing on behalf of the business, as illustrated by a recent decision from Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal, Frieri v. Capital Investment Services, Inc., writes Adam B. Edgecombe of Jimerson & Cobb, P.A.

“Frieri involved an investor who contributed $6 million to a business trust that he formed with the president of a small corporation, with each of them owning 50% of the trust,” Edgecombe explains. “In exchange for the investor’s contribution, the president of the corporation was to transfer 78% of the corporate stock to the trust. However, after the investor paid over his $6 million contribution, the president of the corporation never transferred the stock.”

The investor sued both the president of the corporation and the corporation, alleging that the defendants had breached the stock-purchase agreement. The trial court agreed, entering a final verdict in the amount of $7,369,222.00 against the corporation and the president individually. On appeal, the president and the corporation argued there was no basis for his personal liability.

“The Third District disagreed with the president’s position, finding that, when two businesses contract, the entirety of the document must be analyzed to determine whether the parties intend to bind the businesses alone or whether the obligation extends to the signing agents in their individual capacities,” Edgecombe writes.

Read the article.

The International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR), an organization that works for fair and effective alternative dispute resolution (ADR) practices worldwide, has spoken out against Donald Trump’s attacks on adjudicators.

In a release, CPR said it took this position in response to recent statements made by Trump questioning the impartiality of Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel because of his Mexican heritage, and also questioning whether a Muslim judge could fairly preside over a case involving him.

“Those who sit as judges and adjudicate cases have a well-established responsibility to be fair and impartial,” said CPR President and CEO Noah Hanft. “This obligation is one that all adjudicators, including neutrals on CPR’s own panel of distinguished neutrals that includes many former Judges, take with extreme seriousness. Indeed, it is critical to maintaining both the integrity and stability of the dispute resolution process. Therefore, accusations that judges are biased, based solely upon factors such as their ‘heritage,’ are both dangerous and irresponsible and anathema to basic precepts of justice.”

Hanft concluded, “As an organization committed to improving the way disputes are resolved and driving diversity within the profession, we consider the implication that one’s family background renders him or her biased and unable to adjudicate a matter fairly and without conflict to be a great affront. We call upon other ADR providers, and the legal and business community that relies upon a fair and stable judicial framework, to similarly condemn these statements.”

A federal judge found a pattern of misconduct by Merck & Co., including lying under oath and other unethical practices, freeing Gilead Sciences Inc from paying any damages for infringing Merck’s patents with its lucrative treatments for hepatitis C, Sovaldi and Harvoni, according to a Reuters report.

The ruling follows a March 24 jury verdict that ordered Gilead to pay $200 million in damages, based on findings that Merck’s patents were valid.

In this week’s ruling, U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman said Merck deceptively used confidential information from Pharmasset, Inc, a company Gilead bought in 2011.

“Freeman also said Merck cannot enforce the patents because Merck’s own lawyer gave inconsistent and untruthful testimony during the trial. ‘Merck’s acts are even more egregious because the main perpetrator of its misconduct was its attorney,’ she said,” reports Andrew Chung.

Read the article.