Litigation

HB Ad Slot
HB Mobile Ad Slot

The National Law Review is a no-log-in resource of legal articles addressing litigation, trial practice, appellate practice, and alternative dispute resolution. We provide legal news on the most recent litigated business and commercial cases including antitrust, banking and financial institutions, construction, complex disputes/class actions involving multi-parties and multi-jurisdictions, communications, employment law, environmental actions, government enforcement defense, insurance, intellectual property, mergers and business combinations, products liability, professional liability, real estate and development, environmental, securities enforcement, white-collar criminal actions, and trust and estate litigation. Details of actions by federal and state and local regulatory agencies as well as private actions from across the U.S. are added daily.

The legal experts who write for the National Law Review cover the federal circuit courts as well as the Supreme Court, analyzing the decisions and opinions from the justices at these levels and parsing the meaning and greater context of these decisions.  For coverage of the circuit courts and the decisions at the Supreme Court, the National Law Review has breaking news coverage of these issues. Additionally, coverage of litigation as a process, including rules of evidence, jury selection, and information on expert witnesses is available on the site.

Along with traditional litigation, the National Law Review also covers alternate dispute resolution (ADR), as well as the viability of Arbitration Agreements in a variety of contexts. The benefits of mediation as opposed to litigation, and the benefits of arbitration.  Compulsory arbitration clauses in agreements relating to major corporations, shareholder agreements, or multinational agreements, are covered on the National Law Review.

Additionally, the National Law Review covers trends in -e-discovery and regulations in document analysis and trial preparation. 

We also serve as a resource for the latest developments in civil proceduree-discovery, trial practice, appellate practice, and alternative dispute resolution, including mediation and arbitration involving both binding adversarial proceedings and non-binding voluntary procedures before neutral third parties.

National Law Review Litigation & Class Action Law TwitterFor hourly updates on the latest news about Litigation, Class Action Law Suits, Appellate Rulings, TCPA, and more, be sure to follow our Litigation Law X (formerly Twitter) feed, and sign up for complimentary e-news bulletins.

Recent Litigation, Trial, ADR, E-Discovery & Court News

Title
Custom text Organization
Aug
19
2012
Puyallup Truck Dealership Sued by EEOC for National Origin and Sexual Harassment U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Aug
18
2012
National Right to Work Foundation Files Amicus Brief Challenging President Obama's NLRB Recess Appointments Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Aug
17
2012
Magnetics International to Pay $30,000 To Settle EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Aug
17
2012
The Ninth Circuit finds that the removing defendant met its evidentiary burden by proving the CAFA amount in controversy to a legal certainty Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
Aug
17
2012
New Jersey Appellate Court “Renews” Recommendation that Model Jury Charge For Failure-to-Accommodate Cases Is Needed Faegre Drinker
Aug
17
2012
Hawaii Electric Company to Pay $50,000 to Settle EEOC Disability Discrimination Suit U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Aug
16
2012
Judicial Estoppel Bars Flip-Flop Within the Same Case as to Ownership of Patents McDermott Will & Emery
Aug
16
2012
Right Is Simple Hunton Andrews Kurth
Aug
16
2012
A federal district court in Louisiana addresses amount in controversy requirements in holding that a multi-plaintiff case is neither a class action nor a mass action under CAFA Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
Aug
16
2012
Recent Fee Shifting Cases Caution Against Diving into Non-Compete/Trade Secret Litigation Where the Facts Supporting a Violation are Unknown or Questionable Faegre Drinker
Aug
16
2012
Proposed Rules for Implementing the First-Inventor-to-File Provisions of the America Invents Act Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
Aug
16
2012
Court Catches Unsuspecting Policyholder in Property Insurance Traps Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
Aug
16
2012
Another California Court of Appeal Struggles to Come To Grips with Arbitration Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Aug
16
2012
U.S. Attorney and EPA Announce Settlement with City of Fitchburg U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Aug
16
2012
Northern District of Illinois Holds that Plaintiffs’ Proposal of a Consolidated Trial May Trigger Federal Jurisdiction Under CAFA as a Mass Action Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
Aug
15
2012
JES/Genie Temps to Pay $80,000 to Settle EEOC Disability Discrimination Suit U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Aug
15
2012
Florida Rules to Address Electronically Stored Information Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, P.A.
Aug
15
2012
Third Circuit vacates order granting the defendant leave to appeal an order remanding a class action case to state court where post-remand the state court dismissed the case Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
Aug
14
2012
Eighth Circuit affirms denial of remand in a case where the plaintiff attempted to challenge the court’s CAFA jurisdiction based on an amended complaint filed after removal Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
Aug
14
2012
Halftime Score: Artist 1; ’Bama 0 McDermott Will & Emery
Aug
14
2012
Maximus Will Pay $50,000 to Settle EEOC Disability Discrimination Lawsuit U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Aug
14
2012
Ninth Circuit reverses a remand order where the district court erroneously refused to consider jurisdictional evidence submitted by the removing party Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
Aug
13
2012
A Sticky Situation—Secondary Considerations Require NEXUS to the Claimed Invention McDermott Will & Emery
Aug
13
2012
The Seventh Circuit holds that 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(9) relating to securities class actions is an exception to CAFA jurisdiction, not a prerequisite Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
Aug
13
2012
The Eighth Circuit holds that stipulations filed contemporaneously with a complaint limiting damages to an amount below CAFA’s jurisdictional threshold may be used to defeat CAFA jurisdiction Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
Aug
13
2012
“Clear and Convincing” Is the Standard for Obviousness No Matter What McDermott Will & Emery
Aug
12
2012
Non-Consumer Confusion May Factor into “Likelihood of Confusion” Analysis McDermott Will & Emery
Aug
12
2012
The Ninth Circuit Finds in a Recent Parens Patriae Action that the Case is 99 Persons Short of a Mass Action under CAFA Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
 

NLR Logo

We collaborate with the world's leading lawyers to deliver news tailored for you. Sign Up to receive our free e-Newsbulletins

 

Sign Up for e-NewsBulletins