Like a blog, with focus on news in all of the categories listed here. Straight news, analysis, commentary.

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 [...]

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 [...]

Emboldened by New Resources and Expanded Authority, Feds Continue 10-Year Look Back at Chinese Investment

October 17th, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, News|Tags: , , |

MoginRubin LLP By Dan Mogin, Jonathan Rubin, Jennifer M. Oliver, and Timothy Z. LaComb Journal: Policy Derailed: Can U.S. Antitrust Policy Toward Standard Essential Patents Get Back on Track. Author, Jonathan Rubin, MoginRubin LLP. Podcast: Algorithmic Software Facilitated Price Fixing with Jonathan Rubin Journal:  FTC v. Amazon: Market Definitions and Section 5 of the FTC Act. Author, Jonathan Rubin, MoginRubin LLP Blog: Full Ninth Circuit Removes Unwarranted Hurdles to Class Certificatio. Authors, Jonathan Rubin and Dan Mogin, MoginRubin LLP Blog: FTC’s Case Against Facebook Will Test the Flexibility of U.S. Antitrust Law. By Jonathan Rubin and Jennifer Oliver, MoginRubin LLP OnDemand CLE Webinar:   The Antitrust Case Against Google. Speakers Dan Mogin, Jonathan Rubin, Jennifer Oliver, Timothy LaComb, John Newman, Dr. Alan Grant OnDemand CLE Webinar: Class Certification After Olean v. Bumble Bee, Jonathan Rubin, James Bogan, Jonathan Cohn, Bradley Hamburger Interested in More CLE OnDemand? Click Here. Interested in this program? Click here to send us a note. Emboldened by New Resources and Expanded Authority, Feds Continue 10-Year Look Back at Chinese Investment At a conference earlier this year on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, Assistant Treasury Secretary Thomas P. Feddo spoke with pride of the Committee’s increased funding, jurisdiction, expenditures, and more aggressive review activities. Feddo began [...]

Podcast: Charlie Kingdollar on Social Disparagement

October 15th, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Risk Notes, Insurance, News|Tags: , , , , |

HBLC · HBPC Charlie Kingdollar Social Disparagement - 10:8:20, 7.57 PM Charlie Kingdollar spent more than four decades with General Reinsurance, three-quarters of which as the company's Emerging Issues Officer. One colleague described him as "one of the most prescient and gifted industry futurists I have met in my 36 year professional career within the insurance industry. Entertaining and insightful, his ability to digest and communicate complex issues, many before they are readily apparent, is both a gift and a talent." Follow him on LinkedIn. Charlie Kingdollar on Social Media Disparagement Are the risks posed by social media -- which has added jet fuel to one person's ability to smear another -- adequately addressed by the insurance market? It was my pleasure to interview Charlie for our first emerging issues podcast. It's based on his article on social disparagement which will be featured in the inaugural issue of the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation (JEIL), which will release in January 2021. JEIL is 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 Charlie is, drop me a note at [...]

Cryptocurrency Article and Webinar

September 23rd, 2020|Categories: Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

Cryptocurrency: The Good, The Bad, and the Tricky According to a recent Visual Capitalist article, there are now more than 5,000 cryptocurrencies in circulation, fueling an exploding $200 billion industry. Clearly it is a boom time for virtual asset service providers, or VASPs, like cryptocurrency exchanges and wallet providers. Despite its notoriety, mystique still surrounds cryptocurrency, from its use of blockchain technology, to the benefits and weaknesses of trading decentralized money, to national security implications. With crypto’s rise comes global implications. Its use often makes its way into headlines about criminal activity, such as the recent arrest of a 19-year-old and his friends for their alleged roles in a highly publicized Twitter hack. Forensic tools are in a constant state of development. For example, blockchain analysis tools assisted investigators in quickly identifying the young Twitter hackers, according to a post on the CipherTrace blog. Two Sides of the Digital Coin. There are many upsides to cryptocurrency. Transactions are secure without bank oversight. They can be processed at any time, not just during business hours. It has purchase power anywhere. Finally, cryptocurrency may provide greater benefit to developing countries where the local currency may swing due to exchange rate instability. In such countries, and where many citizens may be unbanked, supplanting traditional coinage with cryptocurrency could stabilize finance and open its doors to many. With crypto’s rise comes global implications. Shortcomings [...]

James Beck on the Drug & Device Law Blog: Something Both Sides Should Agree On (re Class Actions)

September 21st, 2020|Categories: Class Actions, Complex Business Litigation, HB Tort Notes, News|Tags: , , , |

Senior Life Sciences Policy Analyst Reed Smith LLP Drug & Device Law Blog: Something Both Sides Should Agree On (re Class Actions) We’ll be very clear – as we have before:  We don’t like most class actions.  Indeed, if given our druthers, we would abolish Rule 23, as it applies to class actions for damages, altogether.  But that’s not in the offing anytime soon.  Today, we offer a class action decision that we think both sides, us on the defense and those on the plaintiffs side, can agree on, excluding only those responsible for the problem. In Pearson v. Target Corp., 968 F.3d 827 (7th Cir. 2020), the court came up with one possible solution to the class action “objector problem.” What’s that? Well, once a class action settles (as most do), all too often “objectors” come out of the woodwork.  While these objectors purport to assert the interests of the class, usually, all they want is money to make them go away.  Or, as described in Pearson: We address here a recurring problem in class-action litigation known colloquially as “objector blackmail.”  The scenario is familiar to class-action litigators on both offense and defense.  A plaintiff class and a defendant submit a proposed settlement for approval by the district court.  A few class members object to the settlement but [...]

Washington AG Sues Juul, Minnesota Judge Tosses RJR’s Suit to Overturn City’s Flavored Tobacco Ban, Verus Reports

September 14th, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Tort Notes, Mass Torts, News|Tags: , , , |

Manager of Research Services Verus LLC klavin@verusllc.com 609-466-0427 Photo by Rubén Bagüés on Unsplash Litigation Update: Vaping and Flavored Tobacco Products Lawsuits The Washington state attorney general has filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court against Juul Inc., alleging that the company knowingly targeted minors in its marketing campaign on social media in an effort to push its products on young consumers. In the suit, Attorney Bob Ferguson claimed that in using young models, brightly colored ads and candy-flavored vaping juice, Juul violated Washington state’s consumer protection laws and failed to meet state tobacco product licensing regulations which would make the sales of the company’s e-cigarettes unlawful between August 2016 and April 2018 .... In another tobacco-related case, U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Schiltz tossed out R.J. Reynolds’ lawsuit against Edina, MN over the city’s ban on flavored tobacco products.  The company had claimed that Edina had overstepped its authority with a ban that was aimed at curbing vaping by younger consumers. In his ruling, Judge Schiltz wrote that the ban fell under a provision of the federal tobacco laws granting local governments the authority to regulate the sale of certain products .... Read more at VerusLLC.com.

Climate Change Litigation Expands with Addition of Hoboken, NJ’s Suit Against Big Oil

September 14th, 2020|Categories: Environmental Torts, HB Risk Notes, Mass Torts, News|Tags: , , , |

Excerpt of Sept. 2, 2020 post at HobokenNJ.gov. Decades-long campaign of misinformation has directly contributed to effects of climate change in Hoboken, City seeks relief for costs associated with climate adaptation efforts. Hoboken Mayor Ravi S. Bhalla today announced that the City of Hoboken has filed a lawsuit in Hudson County against Exxon Mobil, other Big Oil companies, and the American Petroleum Institute for a decades-long campaign of misinformation related to climate change and its devastating impact on Hoboken. According to the lawsuit, Big Oil companies have caused substantial harm to the public in Hoboken and New Jersey by actively lying about the detrimental effects of their products when in fact their own research indicated otherwise, all in order to generate multibillion dollar profits by producing, marketing, and selling vast quantities of fossil fuels. Big Oil engaged in a continuous practice of misleading the public about climate change and their role in it, directly resulting in adverse impacts in Hoboken including rising sea levels that jeopardize the long-term health of the City. Photo by Patrick Hendry on Unsplash “As a coastal community, Hoboken has directly felt the impacts of climate change, including rising sea levels and more frequent storms,” said Mayor Bhalla. “At the same time we’ve invested hundreds of millions of dollars adapting to the realities of climate [...]

European Union’s Top Court Strikes Down EU-US Privacy Shield

August 25th, 2020|Categories: Corporate Compliance, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Risk Notes, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

European Union's Top Court Strikes Down EU-US Privacy Shield The Court of Justice for the European Union has invalidated the EU-US Privacy Shield as an approved mechanism for transferring personal data from the European Union to the United States. The Privacy Shield had been in place since October 2015, and enabled U.S. companies to more easily receive personal data from EU entities. The decision by the court “leaves many companies scrambling to implement alternative mechanisms to safeguard personal data transfers to the U.S.," says Sten-Erik Hoidal of Frederikson & Byron, P.A. With the invalidation of the privacy shield, companies are essentially left to decide on their own how data will be lawfully transferred. Attorneys from Perkins Coie recommend companies “consider amending any data processing addenda (DPAs) which companies have signed with vendors or customers to incorporate the EU Standard Contract Clauses.” Moving forward, U.S. and European companies will now attempt to create a new deal that complies with the privacy standards for transferring digital information. The first large company to weigh in on the decision, Microsoft tells customers that they “can continue to use Microsoft services in full compliance with European law” and that the ruling “does not change the data flows of our services to Consumers.”   Photo by Tabrez Syed on Unsplash Send Us Your News

Organizational Values & Business Risks: Properly Balancing Stakeholder Concerns

August 6th, 2020|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Complex Business Litigation, Corporate Compliance, Employment, HB Risk Notes, Mass Torts, News|Tags: , , , |

Accommodations. Appropriate accommodation for high-risk employees or employees with family members who are at a heightened risk. Mitigation. Attention to means of mitigating transmission and infection. Tracing. Contact tracing and management of data collected, including health data, as well as responses to employees who refuse to report. Patient Sensitivity. Duty to avoid discrimination and stigmatization. Preparedness. Developing plans to address possibility of re-occurrence in the fall and managing possible outbreaks in company’s offices. On-demand on the Thomson Reuters West LegalEdcenter as part of the HB catalog. Organizational Values & Coronavirus Business Risks: Properly Balancing Stakeholder Concerns Produced for Emory University Center for Ethics by HB Litigation Conferences The current pandemic confronts businesses, nonprofit organizations, governments, and the legal profession with innumerable ethical challenges.  Management issues and liability concerns, stakeholder demands and legal duties become even more complex in an environment of uncertainty and one where the consequences could result in serious illness or even death.  This program seeks to engage the participants in thinking through these challenges and developing processes of ethical response to them.  Managers must acknowledge and address the framework of fear associated with the pandemic, ranging from fear of contagion and death to fears of unemployment, childcare, and the duties of home-schooling.  Additionally, as the economy reopens there must be [...]

$3M Transferred in Fraud Scheme, Law Firm Gets Sued, Says It Followed Client Instructions

July 29th, 2020|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, Emerging Litigation & Risk, HB Risk Notes, Law Firm Operations, News|Tags: , , , , |

$3M Transferred in Fraud Scheme, Law Firm Sued, Says It Followed Client Instructions Two related foundations hired a big law firm to sell stock and execute a merger via wire transfer. Cyber fraudsters had other ideas. Posing as stock seller, and intercepting a verification email, the perpetrators grabbed $3.1 million. The foundations sued the firm in state court in Utah, claiming the firm should have red-flagged certain inconsistencies and known it was being duped. The firm should also have picked up the phone to verify the source of the fraudulent emails and documents. Not so fast, the firm maintains. The plaintiff was not a client and it was only acting on wiring instructions sent via the plaintiff's email system and provided the instructions to the paying agent. The money was sent to the account of an alleged furniture company in Hong Kong. Sorenson, et al. v.  Continental Stock Transfer, Tassel Parent, and Holland & Knight, 3rd. Jud. Dist. Ct., Salt Lake Co., Utah. Download

Go to Top