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 94

Another Successful “Clear Evidence” Preemption Defense
  • Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP
  • USA
  • April 8 2016

This month, the District Court of Utah issued a preemption decision addressing the “clear evidence” standard set forth in the Supreme Court’s


Utah Supreme Court: extrinsic evidence relevant to applicability of I v. I exclusion
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • September 15 2011

The Supreme Court of Utah has held that, under Utah law, a court may consider extrinsic evidence to determine an insurer’s duty to defend where the insurance policy conditions the duty to defend on information outside the underlying complaint. Equine Assisted Growth & Learning Assoc. v. Carolina Cas. Ins. Co., 2011 WL 3652331 (Utah Aug. 19, 2011).


The SCO Group, Inc v Novell, Inc
  • Loeb & Loeb LLP
  • USA
  • February 3 2010

Court grants in part and denies in part defendant’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s slander of title claim relating to software copyrights.


Expert testimony regarding compliance with industry standards is not a violation of the parol evidence rule
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • October 24 2008

In Richins Drilling, Inc. v. Golf Services Group, Inc., the Utah Court of Appeals clarified what type of testimony fell within the parol evidence rule.