We round up the most significant appellate decisions relevant to commercial litigation each week.

Note for readers

Because my practice focuses on complex commercial disputes–especially ones involving antitrust, energy, or intellectual property–I keep daily track of important decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court, the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the highest appeals courts in Delaware, New York, and Texas.

You can follow along during the week on Twitter (@contingencyblog) or here at The Contingency each Monday with this Commercial Appeals Roundup.

Continue Reading Commercial Appeals Roundup

We round up the most significant appellate decisions relevant to commercial litigation each week.

The output of U.S. Courts of Appeals slowed over the summer; the highest courts in Delaware, New York, and Texas went on partial hiatuses; and having finished its 2019-20 Term in June, the U.S. Supreme Court won’t restart its assembly line until October 5. Yet we have a backlog of rulings to report. The 25 blurbs-plus-links below the jump will catch you up on the decisions most likely to affect your commercial litigation practice. Have a great week.
Continue Reading Commercial Appeals Roundup

We round up the most significant appellate decisions relevant to commercial litigation each week.

The summer doldrums have slowed but not halted the flow of rulings by the U.S. Courts of Appeals, but you can’t say the same about the highest courts in Delaware, New York, and Texas.

Despite the more languid pace of federal-court opinions, we have a cornucopia of them–28 in all. I’m happy to say the backlog is a result of having quite a lot to do in my day job at Susman Godfrey.

The state-court pipelines have paused their deliveries since July 31 (in Delaware), July 17 (Texas), and June 29 (New York)–yielding just one opinion (on a rare instance of declining to order a shareholder meeting to elect directors).

Below the jump you’ll find the latest roundup of blurbs-with-links.

Continue Reading Commercial Appeals Roundup

We round up the most significant appellate decisions relevant to commercial litigation each week.

Judgment in German action didn’t bar claim that defendant could (but didn’t have to) bring as counterclaim.

Loan contract that limited arbitration to claims under tribal law violated public policy.

Amount in controversy for purposes of removal under CAFA includes “reasonably possible” punitive damages.

Network monitor patent did more than embody abstract idea under Alice.

Contempt action for violation of bankruptcy discharge order belonged in court despite arbitration clause. ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isys

DACA survives. supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf

Lawyer who won judgment on Argentine bonds had lien on proceeds of settlement he didn’t participate in and could sue Argentina under commercial activity exception to FSIA. ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isys

Arbitration clause required

Here are the Commercial Appeals Roundups for the weeks of April 20-24, 2020 and April 27-May 1, 2020. The Roundups describe a key aspect of precedential appellate rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the highest appeals courts in Delaware, New York, and Texas and provide links directly to

Here’s the Commercial Roundup: Appeals for the week of April 13-17, 2020. As you’ll see, it went heavy on intellectual property and procedure, the latter including rulings on arbitration awards and class (de)certification.

Have a great week. We’ll see you again next Monday.

Be well.

  • Voluntary dismissal without prejudice didn’t trigger right to fees for

The Contingency is slow off the mark this Monday, but it’s not because federal and state appellate courts reduced their output due to COVID-19 last week. That may change as social distancing measures postpone live hearings, but so far so good.

Be well.

  • Article III standing test required more than risk of misdiagnosis or mistreatment

COVID-19 isn’t stopping The Contingency or @contingencyblog, but we are following authoritative directives and best practices and hope you and your families are and remain healthy and safe too.

Barry Barnett

  • Light bulb maker could grant distributor a copyright sublicense to use licensor’s photos of light bulbs without saying so and as matter of