|
|
|
Supreme Court takes up drug company dispute
Headline Legal News |
2014/03/31 15:38
|
The Supreme Court is wading into a patent dispute between rival pharmaceutical companies over a multiple sclerosis treatment.
The justices agreed Monday to hear an appeal from Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., which claims the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit wrongly overturned five of its patents for the drug Copaxone.
The appeals court ruling would allow rivals Mylan Inc., Momenta Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Sandoz, Inc., to start selling generic versions of the drug later this year, after the remaining patents on the drug expire.
A federal district court had earlier ruled in Teva's favor and upheld the patents. Teva says the Federal Circuit should have deferred to factual findings made in the district court.
The justices will hear the case in the fall. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court seems likely to block Secret Service case
Headline Legal News |
2014/03/28 10:29
|
The Supreme Court appeared likely Wednesday to block a group of protesters from bringing free-speech claims against two Secret Service agents who were guarding President George W. Bush during a 2004 visit to Oregon.
The court's liberal justices seemed just as reluctant as the conservatives to find that the agents violated the protesters' First Amendment rights by moving them farther away from the president while allowing a separate group of pro-Bush demonstrators to stay a bit closer.
The protesters claim they were moved for loudly expressing their opinions while Bush was having dinner at an outdoor patio and not for any genuine security reasons.
Deputy Solicitor General Ian Gershengorn argued that agents who make on-the-spot judgments about the president's security should be shielded from liability.
"There are times when we don't want a reasonable official to hesitate before he acts and nowhere is that more important than when the specter of presidential assassination is in order," Gershengorn told the justices. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
French court blocks secret recordings of Sarkozy
Headline Legal News |
2014/03/14 14:52
|
A French court has ordered an ex-aide of Nicolas Sarkozy to pay 10,000 euros ($14,000) in damages and costs to the former French president over secret recordings that were published in an online journal, and instructed the publication to pull down the links.
Sarkozy and his pop-star-supermodel wife, Carla Bruni, had demanded an emergency injunction blocking publication of their conversation, which surfaced in the online publication Atlantico. The court Friday ordered Atlantico to take down the audio files.
Once-trusted aide Patrick Buisson was ordered to pay 10,000 euros in damages to Sarkozy for making the recordings, and Atlantico and Buisson were each ordered to pay 1,000 euros in court costs.
Atlantico has already pulled the playful exchange between Sarkozy and Bruni. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court sides with parent who fled with child
Headline Legal News |
2014/03/07 15:18
|
The Supreme Court has made it harder for a parent in a custody dispute to seek the immediate return of a child under an international treaty to deter child abduction.
The justices ruled unanimously Wednesday that a one-year clock begins ticking when a child is taken out of its country of residence, even if the parent left behind cannot determine where the child is living. In the one-year period, the Hague Convention on child abduction gives judges little option but to return the child to its home country.
After a year, judges have more discretion and must take account of evidence that the child is settled in its new home. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court weighs securities fraud class-action cases
Headline Legal News |
2014/03/05 14:36
|
The Supreme Court is considering whether to abandon a quarter-century of precedent and make it tougher for investors to band together to sue corporations for securities fraud.
The justices hear arguments Wednesday in an appeal by Halliburton Co. that seeks to block a class-action lawsuit claiming the energy services company inflated its stock price.
A group of investors says it lost money when Halliburton's stock price dropped after revelations the company misrepresented revenues, understated its liability in asbestos litigation and overstated the benefits of a merger.
Justices threw out the company's first attempt to block the lawsuit in 2011. But Halliburton is now urging the court to overturn a 25-year-old decision that sparked a tidal wave of securities-related, class-action lawsuits against publicly traded companies and has led to billions in settlements.
The court's 1988 decision in Basic v. Levinson says shareholders who claim they were defrauded by false statements in securities filings don't have to prove they actually relied on the statements. Rather, the court reasoned that any misrepresentation would be reflected in the current stock price. Even if investors are not aware of the misstatements, they are presumed to be aware of them because they affect the stock price.
This presumption, known as the "fraud-on-the-market theory," has become the driving force for modern class-action securities cases. But some economists have questioned whether this theory makes sense anymore, saying it doesn't account for the sometimes random and arbitrary nature of stock trading. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
