Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman
- Company/Commercial (26)
- Corporate (16)
- Employment (12)
- Intellectual Property (12)
- Banking / Finance (10)
- Information Technology (10)
- Tax (8)
- Insurance/reinsurance (7)
- Regulatory and compliance (6)
- Financial services (5)
- Funds (5)
- Construction (4)
- Crime (4)
- Real Estate (4)
- Energy (3)
- Environment (3)
- Healthcare (3)
- Human Rights (3)
- Insolvency & restructuring (3)
- Media/Entertainment/Sport (3)
- Pensions (3)
- Professional Indemnity/Negligence (3)
- Family (2)
- Personal Injury (2)
- Pharma/Biotech (2)
- Privacy and reputation (2)
- Public Sector/Local Authority (2)
- Telecoms (2)
- Clinical/Medical Negligence (1)
- Commodities (1)
- Competition/EU (1)
- PPP/PFI/Commercial projects (1)
- Private Equity (1)
- Transport (Including aviation and shipping) (1)
- Travel and Tourism (1)
Sort By: Newest first | Oldest first
Whoever said ‘a verbal contract isn’t worth the paper it’s written on’ did not have this quite right and recent case law confirms they actually had it quite wrong.
US: corrective action catch 22 — Court of Federal Claims holds agency action must be rational even if GAO protest decision was not
The decision in RUSH reflects the unusual circumstance in which the court effectively sat in appellate review of an earlier bid protest decision by the GAO.
Delaware Supreme Court permits stockholders to overcome corporation’s attorney-client privilege for ‘good cause’
Plaintiff stockholders can inspect documents concerning a corporation’s internal investigation even if those documents are otherwise covered by the attorney-client privilege.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has made it hard for patent owners to amend their claims. Pillsbury’s Patrick Doody outlines the problems this causes and how to fix them.
In Blackhorse v Pro-Football Inc, the US Patent and Trademark Office once again cancelled various registrations for trademarks used by the Washington Redskins football team as being disparaging to Native Americans.
It is too early to administer last rites to the ‘restitution/disgorgement defence’, but a compelling opinionsuggests that its expanding use has been severely curtailed.
Orbis represents one of the few straightforward decisions in recent months relating to subject matter jurisdiction over protests of task or delivery order procurements.
California’s CMIA provides that an individual may recover $1,000 nominal damages based on the negligent release of information by a healthcare provider or other covered party.
For the first time in more than 30 years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has overhauled its guidance on pregnancy discrimination issues.
Demonstrators from a religious order are protesting Cavalli’s use of a design that they claim is demeaning of their religious symbol.
On 1 July 2014, the US Supreme Court agreed to review the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Direct Marketing Association v Brohl.
In Peabody v Time Warner Cable, Time Warner contended that a former account executive was not entitled to overtime pay because she fell into the ‘commissioned employee’ exemption.
Under the English Arbitration Act 1996, the grounds on which an English arbitration award can be challenged in court are very limited.
This issue of Perspectives focuses on recent ERISA fiduciary and tax decisions, which have special importance to plan sponsors and plan fiduciaries.
The Bribery Act 2010 has now been in force for three years. There have as yet been no corporate prosecutions brought under the act.
In this podcast, Paul Harris shares his thoughts and observations on the commercial world, and intellectual property in particular.
California courts are clarifying potential liability under the CMIA of healthcare providers, health plans, pharmaceutical companies and others for the unauthorised disclosure of medical information.
The California Supreme Court in Iskanian v CLS Transportation Los Angeles held that its decision in Gentry v Superior Court is no longer good law.
The importance of careful drafting was recently reiterated by the New York Court of Appeals in Quadrant Structured Products Co v Vertin.
The Ely Lily case highlighted the impact a judicial decision can have on a business. But what of the wider impact a judge can have on the economy as a whole?