This WLF Litigation Division feature highlights WLF court filings, as well as decisions issued in response to WLF’s court filings. In this edition, we list January 2024 filings and results.
Click on the PDF button above for the full report.
Filings
WLF asks Ninth Circuit to reverse a class-certification order in an unwieldy civil-RICO case. (Painters Fund v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals)
WLF urges the Supreme Court to uphold express federal preemption of state law under the National Bank Act. (Cantero v. Bank of America)
WLF asks the Supreme Court of Texas to properly apply the apex doctrine. (In re Meta Platforms, Inc.)
WLF opposes the FCC’s latest proposal to classify broadband internet access as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act. (In re Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet)
WLF joins a coalition of civil-justice reform groups in urging the Ohio Supreme Court to adopt proposed changes to Ohio Rule of Evidence 702. (In re Proposed Amendments to Ohio Rule of Evidence 702)
WLF reminds the FDA that it must comply with the First Amendment when restricting drug and device manufacturers’ truthful scientific speech. (In re Scientific Information on Unapproved Uses)
Results
The Delaware Supreme Court agrees to enforce, as written, contracts between sophisticated parties. (Cantor Fitzgerald, LP v. Ainslie)
The Supreme Court of Texas stays an order allowing Texas to depose a top business executive. (In re Meta Platforms, Inc.)
The Fifth Circuit reverses a district court order declaring the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s structure unconstitutional. (Consumers’ Research v. CPSC)
The Supreme Court declines to hear an important federalism case concerning California’s unfair competition law. (Apple Inc. v. Epic Games)
California’s Court of Appeal holds for the first time that a manufacturer can be held liable for a non-defective product. (Gilead Sciences v. Superior Court)
The Supreme Court declines to clarify the scope of federal preemption over tobacco flavors. (RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Bonta)