10th Circuit Revives Some Lanham Act False Ad Claims In Dog Food Fight
DENVER — A 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel in a July 14 opinion partly reversed a Kansas federal judge’s dismissal of a putative class action Lanham Act false advertising dispute between two pet food manufacturers, holding that the plaintiff-appellant had plausibly alleged at the pleading stage that the defendant-appellee had made some statements that were commercial speech that was false.
10th Circuit Revives Walmart Worker’s Hostile Work Claims In Sex Bias Suit
DENVER — A two-judge panel of the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a New Mexico federal judge’s dismissal of a former Walmart worker’s hostile work environment claims against his employer, while also affirming the dismissal of other federal and state sex discrimination claims, finding that the worker “provided evidence that he was subjected to a significant amount of anti-gay discrimination at work, including at least two outrageous acts.”
Delaware High Court Reverses Nearly $16M Attorney Fee Award In Investment Dispute
NEW CASTLE, Del. — The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed a lower court’s finding that a China-based company did not prove its loyalty- and care-based fiduciary duty claims against an investment fund and its principal in a failed investment attempt and that the investment fund breached its duty of candor, but it reversed the lower court’s award of $15.83 million in attorney fees and expenses to the company because the company prevailed on only a single issue.
5th Circuit Vacates Class Victory In ERISA Conversion Suit Over Standing
HOUSTON — Ruling against a class of retirement plan participants that had prevailed following a bench trial, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals issued an unpublished July 14 opinion vacating the judgment and remanding for fact-finding “to evaluate Article III standing” in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act suit over a retirement plan’s switch from a final average pay formula to a cash balance plan; in a separate concurrence, one member of the panel opined “that the type of consequences alleged constitutes an Article III injury.”
Contents Coverage Limited To $25,000 In Suit Arising From Fire Caused By Lightning
CHICAGO — The Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s ruling in favor of an insurer in a breach of contract lawsuit seeking a homeowners insurance policy’s full $3.5 million limit for the insured’s contents that were lost in a fire sparked by a lightning strike, holding that the policy’s business property exclusion and sublimit cap the insurer’s liability for business property losses at $25,000.
Panel Reverses Dismissal Of Surgeon’s Suit Accusing Insurer Of Retaliation
LOS ANGELES — A California appellate panel on July 13 reversed a judgment dismissing a lawsuit brought by an orthopedic spine surgeon accusing an insurer of interference with prospective economic relations for allegedly retaliating against him after he advocated for his patients to receive coverage for spinal surgeries.
2nd Circuit Vacates Expert Exclusions, Restores Suits In Acetaminophen-Autism MDL
NEW YORK — The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 13 vacated rulings excluding the testimony of four general causation experts retained by parents who allege that prenatal exposure to acetaminophen causes autism or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and the resulting judgments, remanding to the multidistrict litigation judge, who had dismissed the cases for lack of causation.
7th Circuit Holds Prior Work Exclusion Precludes Roofer’s Coverage
CHICAGO — A Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a lower court’s ruling that an insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify a roofing contractor in an underlying suit alleging that the contractor’s negligent repair work contributed to the collapse of a building’s façade, killing two people.
California Panel Reduces $6.5M Punitive Damages Award In Wildfire Coverage Dispute
SAN FRANCISCO — A California appeals panel on July 13 affirmed a jury’s verdict that an insurer breached its contract, acted in bad faith and owed an insured apartment complex owner punitive damages in a coverage dispute arising from the 2017 Tubbs fire but held that the jury’s $6.5 million punitive damages award is “constitutionally excessive.”
Trump Cuts Nearly 3M Acres From National Monuments Citing ‘Public Interest’
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Saying that it is “in the public interest,” President Donald J. Trump on July 13 issued two proclamations shrinking the size of the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante (GSE) national monuments by nearly 3 million acres, citing his authority under the Antiquities Act over an area that has been the subject of ongoing dispute across presidential administrations and may have implications for hydraulic fracturing.
4th Circuit Again Affirms Injunction In Trademark Row, Vacates Attorney Sanction
RICHMOND, Va. — In a pair of opinions, a Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel upheld a North Carolina federal judge’s preliminary injunction against a Dutch software company accused of stealing a North Carolina software company’s branding, code and trade secrets because the Dutch entity targeted United States commercial conduct but vacated a civil contempt sanction against the Dutch company’s attorney because the plaintiff company failed to show that it was harmed by noncompliance with a court order.