ALBANY, N.Y. — Following a bench trial in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act class action challenging a 2011 refinancing that employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) participants alleged improperly benefited the company’s co-presidents, a Georgia federal judge entered judgment for the defendants on the grounds that “the fraud concealment exception does not apply,” so all the claims were untimely.

CHICAGO — An Illinois appellate court affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of an insurer’s suit seeking a declaration that it did not owe coverage beyond the $25,000 policy limits to its insured, who was involved in an auto accident, ruling that the lower court was correct in finding that the insurer’s alleged bad faith liability regarding past conduct, which relates to a separate bad faith suit, “was more properly considered in the bad faith action.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Texas federal judge rightly granted summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of defendant-appellee entities accused of infringing a patent describing air purifying technology because the patent applicant explicitly narrowed the scope of patent claims during prosecution history to exclude the type of reflective surfaces present in the accused devices, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled April 1.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A Florida appeals court panel on April 1 reversed a lower court’s dismissal of a condominium association’s breach of contract lawsuit against an insurer seeking coverage for its property damage that was caused by Hurricane Irma, remanding for the lower court to consider on first instance the insurer’s argument that Florida Statutes Section 95.11(2)(e) operates as a statute of repose and bars the insured’s lawsuit notwithstanding the claims that the insurer intentionally delayed making a coverage determination to postpone the insured’s ability to file suit within the five-year limitations period.

CHICAGO — Eli Lilly & Co. urges the U.S. Supreme Court to review a Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision that affirmed a final judgment of $193 million for a qui tam relator who sued Lilly for reporting falsely deflated drug prices to the government in order to profit off of drug rebate programs, arguing in a petition for a writ of certiorari that the case “vividly illustrates the real-world problems with the . . . qui tam regime” under the False Claims Act (FCA).

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. solicitor general and Cecillia D. Wang of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation debated the meaning and impact of “domicile” before the U.S. Supreme Court on April 1 during oral arguments in a provisionally certified class case challenging a January 2025 executive order (EO) that would end birthright citizenship by requiring at least one parent to be a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The Ohio Supreme Court on March 31 declined to take up a case challenging an appellate court’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence for it to review an asbestos summary judgment ruling.  The appellant had argued that the Ninth District Ohio Court of Appeals’ tactic of simply ignoring appellate issues has become a problem.

AUSTIN, Texas — In a letter to the Texas Supreme Court, a family urges the justices to issue an opinion on the proper causation standard in asbestosis cases during the current term, noting that the parties completed merits briefing in January 2025, before any of the other cases on the court’s docket, and that prompt resolution would ensure that an aged man suffering from the disease can have his day in court.