It’s any law school graduate’s dream: landing an associate position at a BigLaw firm straight out of school. While there is no doubt a certain level of prestige is associated with a big-name law firm, between a flurry of mergers and acquisitions...

New technology is helping small and solo law firms level the playing field with their larger competition. That sure sounds like a true statement, doesn’t it? And yes, it is. But the full story is a little more complicated. For one thing, as past...

Maddox v. City of New York Court of Appeals of New York October 17, 1985, Argued ; November 21, 1985, Decided No Number in Original Opinion  [***727]   [**554]   [*274]  OPINION OF THE COURT MEYER, J. The aeposition testimony of plaintiff, a professional...

Appellants, husband and wife, filed suit against appellee dog owners under Fla. Stat. ch. 767.01 (1987), alleging that appellant wife was injured as a result of the conduct of appellees' dog. In their motion, the appellants alleged that the dog was...

Interactive dashboard aggregates key facts, topics and issues from legal sources, practice-specific content and data-driven analytics to quickly deliver highly relevant results NEW YORK — LexisNexis Legal & Professional ® , a leading global...

Suarez Corp. Indus. v. McGraw United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit October 26, 1999, Argued ; February 2, 2000, Decided No. 98-2696 Opinion  [*678]  HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge: Darrell V. McGraw (McGraw), the Attorney General of West...

Campbell v. Facebook, Inc. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit March 3, 2020, Resubmitted, San Francisco, California; March 3, 2020, Filed No. 17-16873 Opinion  [*1111]  FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judge: Objecting class member Anna St. John ...

McEwen v. NRA of Am. United States District Court for the District of Maine April 14, 2021, Decided; April 14, 2021, Filed No. 2:20-cv-00153-LEW Opinion MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR STAY This case...

Danforth v. United States Supreme Court of the United States November 8, 1939, Argued ; December 4, 1939, Decided No. 309 Opinion  [*276]   [**233]   [***242]  MR. JUSTICE REED delivered the opinion of the Court. A writ of certiorari was granted 1 to...

It was the distinction between funding research projects directly involving the destruction of a human embryo and projects using embryonic stem cells (ESC) derived from an earlier destruction underlaid the instant controversy. Appellants, James L. Sherley...