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

Welcome to summer 2024’s first edition of Commercial Roundup.

  • Force majeure clause in contract for “firm” supply of natural gas from Texas to Arizona didn’t require seller to show Storm Uri made delivery impossible but did mandate proof that it used “due diligence” to protect its Permian Basin source and to tap other sources.
We round up the most significant appellate decisions relevant to commercial litigation each week.

This late-summer edition of Commercial Roundup features a notable ruling on personal jurisdiction, a pair of False Claims Act decisions, a couple of opinions tossing class certification orders, a 2-1 split in a securities fraud case (the dissent has the better end of it), a rare victory for plaintiffs in an action for unlawful maintenance

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

Welcome to this week’s Commercial Roundup—in which you’ll find links to the most significant rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court and the 13 Courts of Appeals plus the highest courts in Delaware, New York, and Texas. You’ll also see other matters of interest to commercial trial lawyers and the firms and business people they represent.

This week a couple of Latin phrases we learned in the first year of law school headline the list. The first—res ipsa loquitur—means something like “the thing (res) speaks (loquitur) for itself (ipsa)” and provides a shortcut for a party wishing to prove a claim of negligence. The other Latin phrase—forum non conveniens—suggests the plaintiff brought a case in a place (forum) whose remoteness to the parties, witnesses, and sources of proof and lack of expertise in governing law (among other factors) render it sufficiently inconvenient (non conveniens) as to justify dismissing the case in favor of, or transferring it to, a much more convenient forum.

We also have an important First Circuit ruling on a pair of issues that arise often in efforts to enforce arbitration clauses and confirm awards, a “tacking” question regarding priority of trademarks, and decisions on when limitations starts to run in securities fraud cases, insurance coverage for COVID-19 losses, damages remedy for fraudulent transfer, and when prior art “anticipates” a claim limitation without mentioning it.

So here we go—Commercial Roundup for the week of April 5-12.Continue Reading Commercial Roundup – April 12, 2023

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

The co-managing partners of my firm issued the message below for Susman Godfrey’s friends and clients, including you.

Expect updates on COVID-19 developments here and @contingencyblog.

Be well.

Barry Barnett

To Susman Godfrey clients and friends:
In this time of concern and disruption because of COVID-19, we at Susman Godfrey have taken steps to