Publication
July 01, 2010

In this edition of The Spotlight, we discuss a number of significant developments, notably the Complex Commercial Litigation section includes a decision of the Delaware Chancery Court holding that shareholders cannot inspect books and records after filing a derivative lawsuit (King) and a district court’s decision in the Eastern District of North Carolina holding that backup tapes do not need to be restored due to undue burden (Martinez-Hernandez). In Electronic Discovery, we report on an award of sanctions by a district court in the Southern District of New York for electronic data lost on a failed flash drive (Wilson).

We address a number of important developments, including several actions taken by the United States Supreme Court as it wrapped up its 2009-2010 term. In Arbitration and Products Liability, we highlight the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari to address preemption (AT&T Mobility and Williamson).  Additionally, in Privilege, we report that the Supreme Court declined to review the First Circuit’s work product ruling in the Textron matter and in Complex Commercial Litigation, the Court resolved a circuit split concerning the scope of the comity doctrine with respect to alleged discriminatory state taxes (Levin).

Additionally, in Heath Care Litigation, we discuss the DOJ’s guidance on utilizing corporate monitor agreements.  The International Bar Association’s new Rules of Evidence are addressed in the International Arbitration section. In Internal Investigations, we report on an award of punitive damages after a party falsely implicated another in an internal investigation (Coster) and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s rejection of collective knowledge as a basis for corporate criminal liability (Life Care Centers of America, Inc.).

Full Article