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 851

California district court finds CAFA’s amount-in-controversy requirement satisfied and no local controversy alleged; denies motion to remand
  • Carlton Fields Jorden Burt
  • USA
  • August 27 2015

The Southern District of California denied a plaintiff's motion to remand a putative class action removed pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act

New York Federal Court finds CGL insurer must defend third-party product recall claims
  • Hunton & Williams LLP
  • USA
  • August 18 2015

A federal court in New York recently found that litigation concerning damages related to a third party's product recall required a defense under a

Top reasons the JPML has denied centralization of products liability and salesmarketing cases
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • July 9 2014

Since May 2011, here are the most-cited reasons the JPML has denied Section 1407 centralization of products liability and salesmarketing cases: The

Clarification of the economic loss rule may greatly expand tort claims in construction litigation
  • Smith Currie & Hancock
  • USA
  • May 31 2013

The economic loss rule is a judicially-created doctrine that sets forth the circumstances under which a tort action is prohibited if the only damages

Court finds coverage for consequential damages arising from product recall
  • Gray Plant Mooty
  • USA
  • January 16 2013

A Minnesota Federal District Court Judge recently ruled that the insured is entitled to defense and indemnification under its commercial liability

Not health insurance
  • Dechert LLP
  • USA
  • February 10 2012

The class action lawyers must be getting desperate, if Reeves v. Pharmajet, Inc., 2012 WL 380186 (N.D. Ohio Feb. 3, 2012), is any indication

Class action round-up - spring 2015
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • June 9 2015

On April 27, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robinssetting the stage for an important decision on whether a

Georgia Court of Appeals holds pollution exclusion does not apply to lead-based paint
  • Rogers Townsend & Thomas PC
  • USA
  • May 12 2015

In a March 31, 2015 opinion, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that an absolute pollution exclusion provision in a CGL policy did not exclude

Class action round-up - spring 2014
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • May 22 2014

In a mortgage-related row, the Ninth Circuit reversed the Central District of California’s grant of summary judgment in favor of several bank

Insurers must defend Four Loko maker in one of five lawsuits
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • January 20 2012

A federal court in Illinois has determined that insurers providing coverage to Phusion Projects, Inc., which makes Four Loko, an alcoholic beverage with large amounts of caffeine and other stimulants, do not have a duty to defend the company in lawsuits alleging injury from intoxication