Showing 5 posts in Complex Commercial Litigation.

Finally! Discovery Harassment of Top-Level Corporate Officers is Curtailed


In a recent decision, the Florida Supreme Court amended Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280, adding a section to codify the “Apex Doctrine” and extend its protections to private corporate officers, whereas in the past it only protected high-level government officials. On its own sua sponte motion, the Florida Supreme Court found that it was best to apply the Apex Doctrine to both private and government officers to provide efficiency in the discovery process, as well as to prevent “undue harassment and oppression of high-level (company or government) officials.” More »

Michigan Tenant's Successful Use of Frustration of Purpose Doctrine to Avoid Paying Rent to Landlord During the Pandemic

On April 7, 2021, in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan lawsuit Bay City Reality, LLC v. Mattress Firm, Inc., 20-CV-11498, Mattress Firm, Inc., a commercial tenant (“Tenant”), successfully relied on the common law defense of Frustration of Purpose to defeat Bay City Realty, LLC’s (“Landlord”) breach of contract lawsuit after Tenant admittedly refused to pay monthly base rent to Landlord for April and May 2020 while Tenant could not open to the public due to Governor Whitmer’s prior Executive Orders. More »

Raising the Bar: Missouri’s New Daubert Law


With the stroke of the pen, Missouri’s newly-minted Republican Governor Eric Greitens has fulfilled a key campaign promise to bring tort reform to the state. On March 28, 2017, Governor Greitens signed legislation aligning Missouri with a large majority of jurisdictions that follow the Daubert standard governing expert testimony and opinion. In adopting the Daubert standard, Missouri leaves the handful of states following neither the Frye nor Daubert standards. The new law allows Missouri litigants to develop expert strategies based on a broad framework of federal precedent and practical jurisprudence from more than thirty states.  More »

Federal Court Bars DOJ from Prosecuting Participants in State Medical Marijuana Programs


On Tuesday, August 16, 2016, a federal appeals court in California barred the Justice Department from prosecuting medical marijuana cases where no state laws were violated. Specifically, in the matter styled United States v. McIntosh, a three judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sitting in San Francisco ordered the Justice Department (“DOJ”) to show that individuals under indictment for violating the Controlled Substances Act violated medical marijuana laws of their respective states before continuing with prosecutions. The opinion addressed ten consolidated matters arising from three district courts in California and Washington State. More »

CLIENT ALERT: Seventh Circuit Negates Need for a Certificate of Insurance Before Loss - CGL Coverage Exists for an Additional Insured if an Oral Agreement Prior to Covered Event


The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Vita Food Products, Inc., No. 15–1405 (7th Cir. Dec. 16, 2015), has issued an important decision with far-reaching impact on the interpretation of “additional insured” status under commercial general liability (“CGL”) insurance policies. With this decision, additional insureds should have an easier time seeking coverage. More »

Get Updates By Email

Blog Contributors