Blurred Lines Between Trademark and Trade Dress: Fifth Circuit Rules On...
In Test Masters Educational Services, Inc. v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 14-20473, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11148 (5th Cir. June 29, 2015), the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that the amended...
View ArticleWI District Court Holds Third-Party Publication Triggers Prior Publication...
In Design Basics LLC v. J & V Roberts Investments, Inc., the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin determined, in pertinent part, that in a case involving allegations...
View ArticleNo Coverage for Consumer Privacy Claims Say Third Circuit and Seventh Circuit
In two recent cases, the Third Circuit and Seventh Circuit each found an absence of coverage under general liability policies resulting from consumer privacy claims, one for alleged violations of a...
View ArticleHoly Stromboli! Grocer Loses Coverage and Bad Faith Battle Against Excess...
In Charter Oak Insurance Company v. Maglio Fresh Foods, No. 14-4094, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 19268 (3d Cir. Nov. 4, 2015), the Third Circuit held that because the underlying lawsuit did not present a...
View ArticleA Sporting Retailer’s Bid for Coverage Gets Punted by the Ninth Circuit
The Ninth Circuit recently handed down a decision holding that insurers did not have a duty to defend their policyholder, a sporting goods retailer, in several ZIP code class action lawsuits. The...
View ArticleAnother Nail in the Junk Fax Coffin: Wisconsin Joins Illinois, California,...
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals held in a recent decision that a standard TCPA exclusion precludes coverage for all causes of action brought by the plaintiff that emanated from the unauthorized sending...
View ArticleWisconsin’s Strict Exhaustion Requirement Burns Insurer
In Burgraff v. Menard, Inc., 2016 WI 11 (Wis. 2016), the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed a Court of Appeals decision that determined Millers First Insurance Company breached its continuing duty to...
View ArticleNot Better Late Than Never: Illinois Appellate Court Finds in Favor of...
The Illinois Appellate Court, in AMCO Insurance Co. v. Erie Insurance Co., ruled in favor of a CGL insurer based on an additional insured’s violation of the policy’s notice condition. This case...
View ArticleDon’t Believe the Hype: Over-Touting One’s Own Products Triggers...
A Virginia federal court rendered an important decision on product disparagement coverage, holding that a policy’s Non-Conformity Exclusion barred coverage for the underlying false advertising claim....
View ArticleSay What You Mean and Mean What You Say, Says California Federal District Court
A California federal district court determined a standard Breach of Contract Exclusion under Coverage B of a CGL policy did not preclude the duty to defend for alleged disparagement. In MedeAnalytics,...
View ArticleIt’s Not a Blob, It’s a Probiotic: Wisconsin Supreme Court Applies the...
In Wisconsin Pharmacal Company, LLC v. Nebraska Cultures of California, Inc., 2016 WI 14, the Wisconsin Supreme Court applied the “integrated systems” rule to a coverage dispute. In a narrow decision,...
View ArticleInsurers May Need a Doctor’s Note: Data Breach of Medical Records Triggers...
On Monday, April 11, 2016, the Fourth Circuit handed down a notable, albeit unpublished, decision with regard to an issue that has vexed the insurance industry, namely, do data breaches trigger a CGL...
View ArticleUp in Smoke: An Insurer Could Not Mount a Successful Coverage Defense Due to...
An Illinois federal district court determined in Diamond State Insurance Company v. Duke that an insurer had a duty to defend its insured in a case involving alleged disparagement. This decision...
View ArticleThird-Party Complaints and the Duty to Defend – Another Decision Cementing...
In Pekin Insurance Company v. Illinois Cement Company, LLC, the Illinois Appellate Court again addressed the important issue of when third-party complaints can be used in evaluating an insurer’s duty...
View ArticleImpactful Wisconsin Supreme Court Decision Overturns “Unsound” Precedent
In Marks v. Houston Casualty Company, the Wisconsin Supreme Court reached a decision upholding the application of a business enterprise exclusion in a professional liability policy. Importantly, the...
View ArticleThe Irony of Not Fixing What Isn’t Broken: Wisconsin Supreme Court Refuses to...
Bootstrapping upon its decision in Marks v. Houston Casualty Co., 2016 WI 53, the Wisconsin Supreme Court in Water Well Solutions Service Group Inc. v. Consolidated Insurance Co., 2016 WI 54, affirmed...
View ArticleTwo Illinois Federal Decisions Highlight the Dangers of Consent Judgments for...
Two related decisions handed down this year by an Illinois federal district court involve thorny issues emanating from a multi-million dollar consent judgment. In the first decision, the district court...
View ArticleClik here to view.
GDPR实施一周年及国家监管机构职责回顾
2019年5月25日，GDPR实施已满周年，一年实施期间让众多跨境企业尤其是在欧洲市场开展业务的跨境企业如履薄冰，社会各界对于GDPR是非功过莫衷一是。周年之际，欧洲数据保护委员会发布官方周年报告First Overview On the Implementation of the GDPR and the Roles and Means of the National Supervisory...
View Article工程内部承包与挂靠的识别问题
近日某客户要求审查公司内部承包经营合同，经通读全文并与客户确认后发现，客户拟通过签署公司内部承包合同的形式，实现工程资质挂靠之实。因此，本着格物致知的精神，尽可能全面地梳理了内部承包与挂靠相关的法律规范（包括法律、法规、司法解释、地方司法性文件），以探究内部承包与挂靠的“罗生门”。 一、内部承包与挂靠的相关法律规范 《关于改革国营施工企业经营机制的若干规定》...
View ArticleClik here to view.
1587年与1768年——A YEAR OF NO SIGNIFICANE?
万历十五年，亦即公元1587年，在西欧历史上为西班牙舰队全部出动征英的前一年，而在中国，这平平淡淡的一年中，发生了若干为历史学家所易于忽视的事件。这些事件，表面看来似末端小节，但实质上却是以前发生大事的症结，也是将在以后掀起波澜的机缘。在历史学家黄仁宇的眼中，其间的关系因果，恰为历史的重点，而我们的大历史之旅，也自此开始...... 叫魂——1768年中国妖术大恐慌 万历十五年——无关紧要的一年
View Article