Six months after the North Carolina Supreme Court overruled the state Court of Appeals and held that a police officer’s mistaken beliefs about the law could be a reasonable basis for a stop, the appeals court pushed back.
A federal judge expressed his frustration with Mississippi’s cap on noneconomic damages when earlier this month he trimmed $4.45 million from a medical malpractice verdict compensating a family for the loss of a young mother and her unborn child.
For the second time in two years, a federal appeals court has rejected an attempt by a former Boston University graduate student to escape paying $675,000 for illegally downloading 30 copyrighted songs.
The Florida Supreme Court ruled yesterday that a U.S. citizen who was sexually assaulted by a masseur at a Cancun resort could not be forced to litigate negligence claims against her timeshare promoters in Mexico court.
A Colorado court has ruled that a law firm had no liability for failing to disclose to a client that one of the partners working on his case suffered from alcoholism and had a history of arrests.
An Oregon man has had his felony drunk driving conviction overturned on the ground that he was improperly barred from presenting a “sleep driving” defense at trial.
A federal court ruling last month looks to be the breakthrough long sought by college athletes who claim they deserve a share of the hundreds of millions of dollars generated by their performances on NCAA football fields and basketball courts.
A Pennsylvania court ruled earlier this month that State Farm had a duty to defend a 71-year-old homeowner sued for shooting a houseguest he mistook for an intruder.
The Pennsylvania Superior Court concluded that the fact the homeowner, James DeCoster, had a blood alcohol level of .187 when he pulled the trigger may mean that an intentional injury exclusion in State Farm’s policy does not bar coverage of the lawsuit.
Five Connecticut divorce lawyers have convinced the state’s high court that they enjoyed absolutely immunity when sued for fraudulently concealing the assets of a client.
The First Amendment does not bar the lawsuit of a former Rutgers quarterback who claims that EA Sports used his likeness without permission in the immensely popular “NCAA Football” series of video games.
That’s the conclusion reached Tuesday by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.