Business vs Business disputes, e.g., IP, fraud, contract breaches, antitrust, whistleblowers, M&A, trade secrets, poaching.

Vince Vitkowsky on Insurance Coverage for Civil Unrest

April 20th, 2021|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, Insurance, News|Tags: , , , , |

Vince Vitkowsky on Insurance Coverage for Civil Unrest Civil unrest. Peaceful protests. Massive marches. Riots. Looting.  Which of these things are not like the other? Recent social outrage over police shootings of Black people -- these events in particular -- have sent people to the streets by hundreds of thousands. In some cases these constitutionally protected activities are followed by property damage, injury and death. Observers continue to debate who is responsible for the violence.  Whatever the answer, as a very practical matter, someone has to pay for the property damage. Join me for my conversation with Vince Vitkowsky of Gfeller Laurie LLP.  Vince  possesses deep knowledge of insurance coverage matters, representing carriers in a variety of areas, e.g. cyber risk, data privacy, general liability, directors and officers liability, health, and more. He combines his experience as a veteran insurance and reinsurance lawyer with a strong background in terrorism and national security law. This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation, a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, Docket Alarm and, most recently, Judicata. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects, or want to tell me how insightful and informative Vince is , please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. I hope you enjoy the [...]

Melicent Thompson on Coverage for Covid-19 Business Income Losses

March 23rd, 2021|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Risk Notes, HB Tort Notes, Insurance, Journal, News|Tags: , , , |

Melicent B. Thompson on COVID-19 Coverage Abstract COVID-19 indisputably has taken an enormous economic toll. Governmental shutdown orders early in the pandemic and ongoing restrictions on business’ operations have resulted in a flood of claims for insurance coverage for business income losses attributable to those orders and restrictions. This article reviews the litigation and legislative developments directed at attempting to find insurance coverage for such losses and the reasons why those efforts have been unsuccessful for the most part. Author Melicent B. Thompson (mthompson@gllawgroup.com) is a Partner with the law firm Gfeller Laurie, LLP, in West Hartford, Connecticut. She thanks her fellow Gfeller Laurie, LLP attorneys who contributed to this article. Melicent has close to 25 years of experience in litigation and corporate counseling. She actively practices in Connecticut and Georgia courts in insurance coverage, business disputes, professional liability claims, defense of educational and financial institutions and general liability. Her insurance coverage practice encompasses all areas of first and third party claims and related litigation services, including declaratory judgment actions, defense of bad faith claims and reinsurance matters. Melicent has substantial appellate court experience, having briefed and argued appeals before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the Connecticut Supreme and Appellate Courts. Her pro bono work includes serving as General Counsel to the Board of Directors of Gifts [...]

Charlie Kingdollar on Emerging Issues Facing the Property & Casualty Insurance Industry

March 17th, 2021|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Tort Notes, Insurance, News|Tags: , , , , |

Emerging Issues Facing the Property & Casualty Insurance Industry: What Has, What Is, What Will Be Charlie Kingdollar was Emerging Issues Officer for GenRe where he worked for 40 years, much of which was spent monitoring hundreds of new risks at any given time. In this article, Charlie discusses risks that have long-since emerged but continue today, risks that are starting to reveal themselves, and risks just starting to appear on the horizon. Read or download his article published in the latest issue of the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation.

Will We See More Antitrust Litigation During Biden Administration?

March 16th, 2021|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, News|Tags: , , , , |

One Current and One Former FTC Official Weigh in on Outlook for Antitrust Litigation (Excerpt from MoginRubin Blog) FTC Commissioner Noah Phillips and George Washington Law School Competition Law Director William E. Kovacic, who once chaired the agency, appeared on a webinar today (March 16, 2021) hosted by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF). Aurelien Portuese, ITIF’s Director of Antitrust and Innovation Policy, asked the speakers what we might expect from the Biden administration in terms of antitrust law, reform, and enforcement. “I think that the aggressiveness that's going on in court right now will increase," Phillips said. "I think you'll see more litigation. What effects that will have I'm not sure. That can result in more antitrust, if you will, but it can also result in losses and legal rulings that don't favor the agencies. But I do think you'll see more litigation." He went on to predict "an increasing attempt to slow M&A generally." “On litigation," former FTC Chair Kovacic said, "the new leadership in many ways is committed to doing much more and, in an exaggerated way, they have denigrated the significance of what's already on the way. They're going to discover in a hurry how hard it is to bring the matters that are in flight already to a successful landing." Read more [...]

Couple Pleads Guilty to $1.1 Million COVID-Relief Fraud After Falsely Claiming to Be Farmers

March 8th, 2021|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, News|Tags: , , , , |

Couple Pleads Guilty to $1.1 Million COVID-Relief Fraud After Falsely Claiming to Be Farmers News From the U.S. Department of Justice A Florida couple pleaded guilty for their participation in a scheme to file four fraudulent loan applications seeking more than $1.1 million in forgivable Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL) loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration (SBA) under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.  On Aug. 26, 2020, Latoya Stanley, 38, and Johnny Philus, 33, both of Miami, were originally charged via a complaint filed in the Southern District of Florida. In Stanley’s PPP application, she claimed to employ 18 individuals from her company, Dream Gurl Beauty Supply LLC. Philus, meanwhile, stated that he employed 29 individuals at his company, Elegance Auto Boutique LLC. In actuality, Stanley and Philus did not employ anyone at their respective companies. In her EIDL application, Stanley claimed to generate over $800,000 in income and to employ five individuals from a farm based in the yard of her Miami home. In his EIDL application, Philus claimed to generate $400,000 in income and to employ 10 individuals from a farm located in the yard of a small residential home. In actuality, Stanley and Philus employed no one and the farms did not exist. Stanley [...]

Employment Law in the COVID-19 Era with Stefani Schwartz

January 22nd, 2021|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, Employment, HB Risk Notes, News|Tags: , , , , |

Employment Law in the COVID-19 Era with Stefani Schwartz Joining me to discuss this important subject is Stefani Schwartz, co-founder of the woman-owned employment-and-labor boutique Hatfield Schwartz in New Jersey. Stefani has devoted her legal career to representing employers in all aspects of employment law, including discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and wrongful termination matters. Stefani will be featured in the next issue of the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation, a collaborative project between HB and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media, Docket Alarm and, most recently, Judicata. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects, or want to tell me how awesome Stefani is, drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. We hope you enjoy the interview, and a guest appearance by Benny, her Portuguese Water Dog, you know, because she's working from home. Stefani also shares one retail customer's quick fix for forgetting her face mask. More of us are working from home and, given it often has advantages, it's an arrangement that is likely to continue for many of us.  This raised the general question: Is your home officially "the office," with all the attendant rules and norms? What new risks do employers face? What new ways can employees find themselves in trouble? We're also getting vaccinated. But many are not. Can companies [...]

Does Data Sharing and Zoombombing Cause Actual Harm?

December 22nd, 2020|Categories: Class Actions, Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , |

Legal Writer Law Street Media Zoom Says Data Sharing, Zoombombing Doesn't Cause Personal Harm Zoom is a good name for this company. It seems to have come out of nowhere to become the new verb for web meetings, robbing that distinction from many more established competitors like WebEx and GoToMeeting, maybe because they don't have cool web-sounding names, although people don't seem to be saying "let's Skype later," as much as they used to. Sure, we still "Facetime," but Zoom really shot to the top when it comes to name recognition. According to CNBC's Ari Levy, Zoom reported fiscal third-quarter revenue growth of more than 300% after seeing 355% expansion in the prior period. The company's stock was up almost seven-fold this year but "pulled back in November on positive news surrounding a coronavirus vaccine," Levy reported. And with success comes risk, especially when dealing with private data.  Here is an excerpt of a post shared with the permission of Fastcase and Law Street Media. --Tom Hagy, HB Litigation Conferences Dec. 4, 2020 (San Francisco) -- On Wednesday [Dec. 2], in the Northern District of California, Zoom Video Communications filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ first amended consolidated class action complaint (FAC) on the grounds that the FAC failed to state a claim for which relief may be [...]

Biogen Pays 22M To Resolve False Claims Act Charges For Paying Kickbacks

December 18th, 2020|Categories: Class Actions, Complex Business Litigation, News|Tags: , , , |

The Justice Department has announced that Biogen, Inc., has agreed to pay $22 million to resolve claims that it violated the False Claims Act by illegally using foundations as a conduit to pay the copays of Medicare patients taking Biogen’s multiple sclerosis drugs, Avonex and Tysabri. Biogen did not admit liability in reaching the agreement. […]

FTC’s Case Against Facebook Will Test the Flexibility of U.S. Antitrust Law

December 10th, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , |

MoginRubin LLP Washington, DC | San Diego Explore more from MoginRubin LLP! Blog: Emboldened by New Resources and Expanded Authority, Feds Continue 10-Year Look Back at Chinese Investment. By Dan Mogin, Jonathan Rubin, Jennifer Oliver, and Timothy LaComb. List OnDemand CLE Webinar: The Antitrust Case Against Google. Dan Mogin, Jonathan Rubin, Jennifer Oliver, Timothy LaComb, John Newman, Dr. Alan Grant Blog: FTC’s Case Against Facebook Will Test the Flexibility of U.S. Antitrust Law.Authors: Jonathan Rubin and Jennifer Oliver, MoginRubin LLP Blog: Full Ninth Circuit Removes Unwarranted Hurdles to Class Certification. Jonathan Rubin, Dan Mogin. Journal: Policy Derailed: Can U.S. Antitrust Policy Toward Standard Essential Patents Get Back on Track by Jonathan Rubin Webinar: Class Certification After Olean v. Bumble Bee with Jonathan Rubin, James Bogan lll, Jonathan Cohn, Bradley Hamburger. Journal: FTC v. Amazon: Market Definitions and Section 5 of the FTC Act Podcast: Algorithmic Software Facilitated Price Fixing with Jonathan Rubin Plus, additional insights from the MoginRubin Blog. FTC's Case Against Facebook Will Challenge the Adaptability of U.S. Antitrust Law Society leads, and the law follows. This is especially true in antitrust, where industries and markets undergo constant change brought about by innovation and changing consumer behavior. Confronted with ever evolving commercial circumstances, the courts face a constant struggle to keep up. With the filing of the antitrust cases against [...]

Chubb’s COVID-19 Claim Denials Draw Litigation from Hollywood

December 7th, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, HB Tort Notes, Insurance, News|Tags: , , , |

Editor and Managing Director HB Litigation Conferences Editor@LitigationConferences.com Chubb’s COVID-19 Claim Denials Draw Litigation from Hollywood Well-known policyholder and insurance recovery attorney Kirk Pasich and his firm have sued Chubb insurance companies on behalf of policyholders in the entertainment industry to recover millions in losses they suffered as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. Entertainment Business Interruption On Nov. 11, 2020, the firm filed suit on behalf of United Talent Agency LLC in Los Angeles County Superior Court against Vigilant Insurance Co. and Federal Insurance Co. UTA seeks coverage for the millions it lost when concerts and television and movie projections had to be cancelled. The complaint says both carriers are part of the Chubb group, “which has adopted a universal practice of denying coverage for all business interruption claims associated with SARS-CoV-2, Covid-19, and subsequent events” (UTA v. Vigilant, No. 20STCV43745, Calif. Super. Ct., Los Angeles). Acts affected include Post Malone, Guns N' Roses, and Toby Keith. The case hinges in part on the carriers’ assertion that there was no “physical loss or damage.” UTA finds Vigilant based its finding on little information, and knowing for decades that "many courts have held that the presence of a hazardous substance on a property, including the airspace inside buildings, constitutes property damage and that there may be ‘direct [...]

Assessing Risk in Medical Malpractice Mediation

December 5th, 2020|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Complex Business Litigation, Insurance|Tags: , , , , , , |

HB Litigation Conferences presents Assessing Risk in Medical Malpractice Mediation CLE-eligible on demand webinar | Recorded 2021 Lawyers and claims professionals assess litigation outcomes all the time. The parties do not. You can help. Understandably, parties in medical malpractice disputes do not fully appreciate the risks inherent in litigation and are not aware of how continued litigation affects their underlying interests in the dispute. For example, some parties see the outcome as a reflection of their personal character. These challenges can hamper the parties' ability to make good decisions in litigated medical malpractice cases. Even organizations that are experienced in assessing litigation risk can make more decisions in these cases with adverse outcomes. Hear our panel of medical malpractice and insurance attorneys and litigation experts as they share their insights on successfully guiding individuals and organizations through these disputes. Registration Includes Nearly 90 minutes of insights from experienced professionals. CLE credit: 1+ (subject to bar rules). For CLE questions: CLE@LitigationConference.com The complete Power Point presentation. Continued access to the complete recording for later use. Answers to your questions via email to the presenters or write to HB and we will be sure to contact the speakers. REGISTRATION Key Points What are the intangible costs of medical malpractice litigation for individuals and [...]

The Antitrust Case Against Google

October 30th, 2020|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Complex Business Litigation, HB Risk Notes, Mass Torts, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , |

The Antitrust Case Against Google Perspectives from highly regarded competition law attorneys, litigators, and economists. This overview and Q&A has been developed for advertisers, mobile device makers, app developers, corporate counsel, business writers, and search market participants. The U.S. Department of Justice and 11 states have filed a sweeping antitrust suit against Google alleging the tech giant  abuses its position as "monopoly gatekeeper for the internet" to block competitors. The complaint says Google has used anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in the markets for general search services, search advertising, and general search text advertising. The federal and state governments charge Google uses "exclusionary agreements, including tying arrangements" to "lock up distribution channels and block rivals." Google's considerable wealth helps make this happen. Google pays billions of dollars a year to distributors to secure their position as the default search engine, and prohibits these companies from dealing with Google competitors. Google's exclusionary strategy is being applied more harshly in newer technologies, such as voice assistants, and in its goal of dominating other platforms in the IoT category, such as smart speakers, home appliances, and autonomous cars. Without a court order, the government plaintiffs say, "Google will continue executing its anticompetitive strategy, crippling the competitive process, reducing consumer choice, and stifling competition." What does all of this mean [...]

Go to Top