TRENTON, N.J. - Purchasers of cedar shingles that allegedly cup and curl due to water retention asked a federal judge in New Jersey on May 3 to stay proceedings pending their appeal of a March 28 decision denying their motion for class certification and striking testimony from an expert (Ilene Stern, et al. v. Maibec, Inc., No. 11-3951, D. N.J.).
NEWARK, N.J. - A New Jersey federal bankruptcy judge on May 1 declined to decide a request by former Chapter 11 debtor G-I Holdings Inc. to enforce its reorganization plan injunction to bar indemnification claims for cleanup of a polluted industrial site, saying G-I's appeal of a remand order in the dispute deprives her of jurisdiction (In re: G-I Holdings, Inc., et al., Nos. 01-30135 and 01-38790, D. N.J. Bkcy., 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 1194).
NEWARK, N.J. - Class counsel's failure to comply with basic discovery obligations requires imposing sanctions and an order mandating compliance, a company accused of hiding and destroying evidence of asbestos-contamination of its talc 25-years ago told a federal judge in New Jersey on May 1. Meanwhile, the parties continue to battle over whether third-party attorneys and firms must turn over evidence relating to the underlying asbestos tort claims (Kimberlee Williams, et al. v. BASF Catalysts LLC, et al., No. 11-1754, D. N.J.).
NEWARK, N.J. - A federal judge in New Jersey on May 1 limited the testimony of a robbery defendant's expert on eyewitness identification so that the expert's testimony will assist, not impinge upon, the jury's fact-finding role (United States of America v. Gregory A. Jones, No. 16-516, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65721).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A New Jersey federal judge's conclusion that a patent was not invalid because a 2011 statute changed the relevant standard for a commercial offer for sale was reversed May 1 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al., Nos. 16-1284, -1787, Fed. Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 7650).
PHILADELPHIA - A Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 28 affirmed a man's conviction and order to pay $3.8 million in restitution for violating the Anti-Kickback Act when bidding for work to clean up a Superfund site in New Jersey, holding that the evidence presented by the government was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the judge did not err when calculating the restitution amount (United States of America v. John A. Bennett, No. 16-3405, 3rd Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 7615).
TRENTON, N.J. - Ten years after its first trial and seven after its second, a New Jersey appeals court panel on May 2 sent an Accutane bowel injury case back for a new trial, saying that intervening Alabama case law requires that defendant Hoffman-La Roche Inc. not be limited on how many experts it can present and the prescribing dermatologist must be asked if a different warning about the risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) would change her decision to prescribe (Andrew McCarrell v. Hoffman-La Roche, Inc., et al., No. A-4481-12T1, N.J. Super., App. Div.).
NEWARK, N.J. - The New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division created a "bright-line" rule April 27 that forbids expert witnesses from presenting an opinion in a civil personal injury case heard by a jury on the concepts of symptom magnification and malingering in an attempt to impeach a party's credibility (Alexandra Rodriguez v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. A-4137-14T3, N.J. Super. App. Div., 2017 N.J. Super. LEXIS 56).
TRENTON, N.J. - A New Jersey federal judge on April 26 denied a motion by generic drug maker Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc. to dismiss a False Claims Act lawsuit in which two pharmacists accuse the company of inflating wholesale drug prices (United States of America ex rel. Azam Rahimi, et al. v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals [USA], Inc., et al., No. 15-6536, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63401).
NEWARK, N.J. - After an appeals court revived a putative class action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) related to the theft of laptops containing policyholders' personally identifiable information (PII), an insurer on April 21 filed a renewed dismissal motion in New Jersey federal court, arguing that statute governs actions of credit-reporting agencies, not health insurance providers (In Re Horizon Healthcare Services Inc. Data Breach Litigation, No. 2:13-CV-07418, D. N.J.).
TRENTON, N.J. - A homeowners insurer filed a declaratory judgment complaint in federal court in New Jersey on April 21 after intervening in a lawsuit alleging that two Rutgers University students, including one football player, sexually assault another student on campus (K.L. v. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, et al., No. 16-9270, D. N.J.).
NEWARK, N.J. - A federal judge in New Jersey on April 17 substantially denied a motion to dismiss filed by defendants in a copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets lawsuit, ruling that a company has properly pleaded its claims against a majority of the defendants in the action (Jorgensen & Co. v. Gary Sutherland, et al., No. 15-7373, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59108).
TRENTON, N.J. - A group of New Jersey residents on April 16 filed a brief in New Jersey federal court contending that their complaint against a refining company alleging contamination from heavy metals asserts valid claims (Juan Duarte, et al. v. United States Metal Refining Company, No. 17-1624, D. N.J.).
TRENTON, N.J. - Factual issues remain on whether damage caused by a window subcontractor manifested before or after an insurer's policy periods, a New Jersey federal judge ruled April 12, denying summary judgment to two insurers in a contribution lawsuit over defense costs incurred by the one insurer in a construction defects case (American Fire and Casualty Co. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Co., No. 14-04696, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56450).
PHILADELPHIA - A Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on April 11 affirmed a New Jersey federal court's dismissal of a lawsuit challenging a ruling that a man was ordered to reimburse a health benefit plan after he obtained a settlement from a third party for injuries he suffered in an accident, saying the lawsuit is barred by the doctrine of res judicata (Bernard McLaughlin, et al. v. Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan, No. 16-4108, 3rd Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6195).
TRENTON, N.J. - Two former executive team leaders on April 6 accepted a $83,000 offer of judgment filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey by Target Corp. and Target Corporation of Minnesota (collectively, Target), ending their proposed collective action that accused the retailer of misclassifying them as exempt from receiving overtime pay (Richard Locicero, et al. v. Target Corporation, et al., No. 16-5592, D. N.J.).
TRENTON, N.J. - A New Jersey federal judge on April 5 denied motions for reconsideration filed by two insurers and their insured after determining that the court did not commit a clear error of law in interpreting the applicability of the policies' per-occurrence limits and absolute pollution exclusion in an environmental contamination dispute (Castoro & Co. Inc. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. Inc., et al., No. 14-1305, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52140).
SOUTH BEND, Ind. - A group of shareholders have met all statutory requirements to serve as lead plaintiffs in a securities class action lawsuit against a medical equipment developer and certain of its executive officers, a federal judge in New Jersey ruled April 3 in granting their motion for appointment as lead plaintiffs (Rajesh M. Shah v. Zimmer Biomet Holdings Inc., et al., No. 16-0815, N.D. Ind., 2017 U.S. LEXIS 50236).
CAMDEN, N.J. - Insureds have failed to provide sufficient evidence to show that their homeowners insurance provider acted in bad faith in denying their claim for coverage, a federal judge in New Jersey ruled April 3 in granting the insurer's motion to dismiss (William Williams, et al. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Co., No. 16-9028, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50261).
NEWARK, N.J. - Dismissal of claims against a pharmaceutical company's director in a securities class action lawsuit is proper because lead plaintiffs failed to serve the director within the statutorily required 120-time period and failed to show that an extension of that time period is warranted, a federal judge in New Jersey ruled March 31 in granting the director's motion to dismiss (Robin J. Dartell, et al. v. Tibet Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., No. 14-3620, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48915).