In today’s legal landscape, jury awards to personal injury plaintiffs are trending upwards. Studies show that “nuclear verdicts” are increasing in prevalence as jurors grow more critical of corporate defendants and are increasingly persuaded by provocative trial tactics from plaintiff attorneys. However, recent decisions from Louisiana and Texas show that some courts are bucking the
General Litigation
The Supreme Court Agrees to Hear a Second Case Challenging Chevron Deference & Multiple Third-Party Groups File Amicus Briefs Asking the Court to Overrule Chevron Deference
Kean Miller is closely following the recent challenges to the Chevron Deference standard established by the Supreme Court in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984). As applied by federal courts for the last four decades, the Chevron Deference standard first requires that a court determine whether a statute…
Louisiana Supreme Court Clarifies the Open and Obvious Defense in Farrell v. Circle K. Stores, Inc., et al.
For decades, the Louisiana Supreme Court has grappled with the “open and obvious” liability defense, making several attempts to determine its proper use within Louisiana’s duty-risk negligence analysis. The latest of these cases is Farrell v. Circle K Stores, Inc. and the City of Pineville, in which the Court changed course from multiple of…
The Diversity Disclosure Statement: A New Amendment to Rule 7.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
In 2021, there were more civil cases filed in federal court based on diversity of citizenship than any other jurisdictional basis.[1] That means any changes to the rules affecting diversity cases are bound to affect lots of litigants. On December 1, 2022, one such change took effect.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1(a)(2) now…
Louisiana Supreme Court Debunks Voluntary Pay Doctrine
In Leisure Recreation & Entertainment, Inc. v. First Guaranty Bank, the Louisiana Supreme Court found the voluntary pay doctrine to be in direct conflict with the Civil Code. In this action, the borrower was to make payments with interest accruing at 6.5% for years one through five of the loan, 7.5% in years six…
Are there any hazards in Louisiana that are “open and obvious” in the eyes of Louisiana Courts? A must read for any business owner regarding their premises.
In trip and fall litigation, the validity of a plaintiff’s claim often turns on whether the condition allegedly causing the fall is a so-called “open and obvious” risk of harm. That is, a risk of harm that is so obvious and discoverable that a reasonable person would have avoided the hazard, and ultimately, the injury.…
Important New U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Holding Prejudice No Longer Required To Show Waiver Of Arbitration Agreements
In the recent unanimous United States Supreme Court opinion, Morgan v. Sundance, Inc., No. 21-328, 2022 WL 1611788 (2022), issued May 23, 2022, the Court abrogated existing case law and held that prejudice is not a condition of finding that a party, by litigating too long, waived its rights to stay litigation or compel…
Issuing Unconditional “McDill” Tender to Plaintiffs with Pre-Existing Injuries
Under Louisiana law, uninsured/underinsured (“UM”) insurers are under strict requirements to issue “good faith” unconditional tenders of the undisputed portion of the plaintiff’s damages. These unconditional tenders are not contingent on the final disposition of the case, rather they must be paid up front and cannot be recovered in the event of a lower judgment…
The Federal Arbitration Act: When jurisdiction arises solely from a federal question in the underlying dispute, can a federal district court confirm or vacate an arbitration award under the FAA? Stay tuned for an answer from SCOTUS!
Last week, the Supreme Court of the United States heard argument in Badgerow v. Walters[1] as to an important jurisdictional question under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. 1, et seq. Specifically, the question presented to SCOTUS was whether federal courts have subject-matter jurisdiction to confirm or vacate an arbitration award under…
The Fifth Crime: Ecocide
A panel of 12 lawyers from around the world recently proposed a legal definition for a new crime: ecocide. For years, the panel, along with various international groups, has sought to amend the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to include ecocide as one of the crimes within the court’s jurisdiction.
Currently, the ICC…