(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed a finding of no liability in a trade secret misappropriation case where a jury found that a competitor did not steal Raytheon's trade secrets relating to the production of infrared cameras. Raytheon appealed but the Federal Circuit affirmed denial of the company's JMOL and new-trial motions, and also affirmed denial of the competitor's motion for attorney fees.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed. Concluding a witness was unavailable due to invocation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, the district court admitted prior civil deposition testimony. The panel affirms, finding any error was harmless because excluding the depositions would not have changed the outcome of the trial.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed in part, reversed in part. Defendant’s conviction for second-degree murder affirmed. However, because second-degree murder can be committed recklessly, it does not categorically constitute a “crime of violence.” Therefore, the conviction of discharging a firearm during a crime of violence is reversed.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Different charges involved in a nested set of charges were divisible and a jury could find the accused guilty of the underlying Hobbs Act robberies.

NORTH Bondi Surf Club is proving to be a hotbed of talented youngsters, with Hamish Donkin the latest product set to make a mark at the top level.

Koda Killorn is shaping up as a real threat ahead of the NSW Grommet State Titles at his home break of Maroubra Beach.

(United States First Circuit) - Conviction of illegal insider trading, after defendant received material, nonpublic information about a local bank from a fellow country club member and then used that information to make a substantial trading profit, is affirmed over defendant's claims that the government presented insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict, and that the trial court's instructions allowed the jury to convict him without finding that he possessed the necessary mental state, as required by 15 U.S.C. section 78ff(a).

(California Court of Appeal) - In a civil enforcement action brought by the State of California against appellants for violation of the unfair competition laws (UCL), Bus. & Prof. Code section 17200 et seq., arising out of a complex real estate scam through which appellants acquired and rented real estate belonging to others, the trial court's judgment and award of damages in favor of the People is affirmed over defendants' six arguments on appeal.

(United States First Circuit) - Affirmed the fraud-related convictions of a man who falsely promised to provide professional legal assistance to individuals who were behind on their court-ordered child support payments. On appeal, the defendant made several claims of trial and sentencing error. The First Circuit affirmed his convictions and the order of restitution but remanded for resentencing using the proper version of the Guidelines Manual.

(California Court of Appeal) - In appeal from a judgment affirming a medical malpractice arbitration award in favor of defendant, judgment is reversed and remanded, where the California Arbitration Act and the California Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitrations require that: 1) a neutral arbitrator disclose that a lawyer in the arbitration is a member of the administering "dispute provider resolution organization"; and 2) section 1286.2 (a)(6) compels a trial court to vacate the arbitration award if the arbitrator fails to disclose that information.

(United States Second Circuit) - In appeal by attorney of Committee on Admissions and Grievances findings of misconduct and recommendation for public reprimand, recommendation is adopted, where: 1) the Court does not find error in the majority of the Committee's findings of misconduct and defers to its assessment of credibility although the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence that Payne had intentionally prejudiced or damaged his clients but instead neglected legal matters entrusted to him; 2) arguments not raised to the Committee are barred; and 3) Payne's misconduct was sufficiently egregious to warrant a public reprimand.

(United States Federal Circuit) - In a suit involving claims of patent infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets, arising from an award of a military contract to its competitor to provide infrared cameras, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants is reversed, as it was for the jury and not for the district court to determine when plaintiff should have first discovered the facts supporting its cause of action. Here, the district court erred by resolving genuine factual disputes in favor of the defendant, the moving party, in concluding that the statute of limitations barred plaintiff's claim.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - The district court did not abuse its discretion in staying plaintiffs' action seeking declaratory relief that it was not committing violations asserted by defendants in an earlier filed state law action, pending the resolution of the earlier parallel state lawsuit filed by defendants, where plaintiffs had every opportunity to procure a federal forum by removing defendants' first filed state suit rather than by bringing a separate federal action in an entirely separate federal district.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Dismissing the appeal of a district court's denial of an application for writ of mandamus seeking to avoid the production of a report produced at the direction of counsel in a case involving the alleged theft of driverless vehicle technology where attorney-client and work-product privilege were claimed because alternative means of relief were available, the petitioner could not establish a clear and indisputable right to mandamus relief, and the district court properly determined that privilege did not apply to the discovery document at issue.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed a finding of no liability in a trade secret misappropriation case where a jury found that a competitor did not steal Raytheon's trade secrets relating to the production of infrared cameras. Raytheon appealed but the Federal Circuit affirmed denial of the company's JMOL and new-trial motions, and also affirmed denial of the competitor's motion for attorney fees.

(California Court of Appeal) - In a dispute involving two competing healthcare companies, held that nurse recruiters who left one company to join the other did not breach clauses in their contracts that prohibited them from soliciting other employees to leave, because those clauses were unenforceable here. Affirmed summary judgment for the defendants.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Distict court’s summary judgment that deceased BSNF employee was not acting within the scope of his employment when driving to work affirmed. Deceased was a BNSF railroad employee, but in court’s judgment no jury could reasonably find BSNF negligent in any way, so the question of work status need not be addressed.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed. Plaintiff sued Defendant for a slip and fall accident in the BART station on the theory that the train operator owed a heightened duty of care under Civil Code section 2100. The trial court dismissed the action on the grounds that Defendant had no liability for accidents that did not occur on the train. The appeals court agreed also holding that section 2100 does not apply to minor commonplace hazards in a train station.

(United States Second Circuit) - Conviction of various fraud and conspiracy charges arising out of defendant's involvement in a conspiracy to defraud insurance companies in connection with claims under New York's No Fault Comprehensive Motor Vehicle Insurance Reparation Act, N.Y. Ins. Law section 5102 et seq., which requires that a medical services professional corporation providing treatment under the Act be owned by a licensed physician, is affirmed over defendant's claims that she was the owner of the professional corporation, where New York law is clear that ownership for purposes of the No Fault statute means more than mere paper ownership and that factors beyond formal indicia of ownership may be considered by a fact-finder in determining ownership under New York's no-fault insurance laws.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed. Trial court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim on the grounds that the claimed agreement entered into with Defendant had not be approved by the Defendant’s governing board as required by New York Town Law, hence there was no valid and enforceable contract.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed. Plaintiff brought a class action against Defendant alleging Insurance Code violations and unfair business practices for the insurance rates Defendant charged in its car rental business. The trial court found no illegal or fraudulent business practice or any economic injury. Judgment was entered in favor of the Defendant.

(California Court of Appeal) - Dismissed part of appeal and affirmed part. Plaintiff filed a class action complaint against Defendant alleging wage and hour violations and a unfair competition law claim (UCL). Defendants sought to compel arbitration. The trial court granted Defendant’s motion as to Plaintiffs individual claims, allowed the arbitrator to decide the class action claims, and denied the motion as to the UCL claim. The appeals court found that the motion that granted arbitration could not be appealed and found no error in the denial of arbitration for the UCL claim.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed. The panel held that the district court correctly instructed the jury to apply a “but for” causation standard, rather than a motivating factor standard; an ADA discrimination plaintiff must show the adverse employment action would not have occurred but for the disability.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed in part, reversed in part. The panel affirmed Los Angeles County was not entitled to 11th Amendment immunity because the County was not an arm of the state when it administered the In-Home Supportive Services program. The court reversed on the collective period’s effective date.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that an award of damages compensating an injured railroad worker for lost wages was subject to taxation under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act. The worker contended that the wages he recovered in this Federal Employers' Liability Act case should not be considered compensation subject to the payroll tax, which funds a self-sustaining retirement benefits system for railroad workers. Disagreeing, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the tax applied. Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of a 7-2 Court.