We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 2,171

Cloudy skies ahead for providers? CMS’ release of Medicare billing data combined with Physician Payment Sunshine Act data may boost fraud litigation
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • June 5 2014

In February 2013, we reported (on our Healthcare Law Blog) that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the final rule for the


Commingling and personal piggy bank leads to summary judgment on veil piercing claims
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • May 13 2014

In Webmediabrands, Inc. v. Latinvision, Inc., No. 6010482010, the Supreme Court (J. Friedman) pierced the corporate veil at the summary judgment


Supreme Court hands major win to landowners
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • June 25 2013

By a 5-4 vote, the conservative wing of the United State Supreme Court answered two big questions in favor of the landowner, changing the way local


An FCA kerfuffle: First Circuit reaffirms the intent of the "first to file" rule and deepens circuit split
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • June 26 2013

The First Circuit has added its say on the meaning of the False Claims Act's "first to file" rule (31 U.S.C. 3730(b)(5)) by holding that a


Second Circuit digs its heels into Louboutin dispute; finds "red sole" trademark protectable, but limited in scope
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • September 20 2012

On September 5, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its long-awaited and highly anticipated decision in Christian Louboutin S.A. v. Yves Saint Laurent Am. Holding, Inc


Suits brought by state AGs alone not “mass actions”: SCOTUS sides with 4th, 7th, and 9th Circuits in clarifying CAFA’s mass action requirements
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • January 17 2014

In Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., No. 12-1036, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 645 (Jan. 14, 2014) the Supreme Court of the United States addressed


Deutsche Bank victory may have far-reaching consequences
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • January 23 2014

A unit of Deutsche Bank recently won dismissal of a suit brought by mortgage bond investors after a New York state appeals court determined the


Sham Hatch-Waxman infringement suits and FDA citizen petitions; a potential for new liability for innovators?
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • August 12 2014

Under what is commonly known as "Noerr-Pennington immunity," persons exercising their First Amendment right to petition the government for redress


No CEQA review required for initiative measures, whether adopted by City Council or voters
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • August 8 2014

The Supreme Court of California has held that CEQA review was not required before the Sonora City Council adopted an initiative measure approving a


California appellate court issues a decision that mutual of Omaha insurance agents qualify as independent contractors as a matter of law
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • January 2 2012

On December 31, 2011, as a final act for the year, the First Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal issued a good appellate decision for employers on the issue of independent contractor status, Arnold v. Mutual of Omaha