Update (March 24, 2017): Sr. U.S. District Court Judge David S. Doty’s opinion in the dispute described below makes the case look like a no-brainer. Plaintiff Ayala had an agreement with his employer, CyberPower, that his salary would be $X until the business had revenue of over $Y million (at which time he would get […]

Update (March 24, 2017): Imagine the frustration and humiliation of a candidate losing an election when running unopposed. This is how trial lawyers can feel when they lose motions for entry of default judgments — that is, when a defendant knows of a lawsuit against it, offers no defense, the plaintiff’s trial lawyer moves for a […]

Update #5 (March 22, 2017): How much does a contingent promise to pay of $37,837,510.45 dollars cost? As we understand a recent order in the case discussed below (and it is not at all clear that we do), the answer might be $525,000?  In any event, defendant Essar Steel appealed the adverse verdict against it, […]

Update (March 20, 2017): About three years ago, in connection with the lawsuit of Kokocinski v. Medtronic, Minnesota Litigator expressed reservations about the tough obstacle before plaintiffs’ lawyers placed by the PSLRA (Private Securities Litigation Reform Act) and an alternative avenue toward recovery that plaintiffs and their lawyers were forced to pursue: the shareholders’ derivative lawsuit […]

While every life story is unique, Minnesota litigator Rachhana Srey’s journey (and her whole family’s history) is particularly amazing. Ms. Srey was born in a chicken coop in a refugee camp in Cambodia and she is now a preeminent wage-and-hour class action plaintiff’s lawyer in Minnesota at the law firm of Nichols Kaster. Profiling Ms. […]

Update (March 16, 2017): It is widely known that plaintiffs’ lawyers tend to want juries to decide cases. Defense lawyers tend to want judges to decide cases (aka “bench trials”). The Blue Cross v. Wells Fargo case was no exception. The Blue Cross v. Wells Fargo case went to a jury, with certain issues reserved […]

The Minnesota/Texas law firm of Droel pllc had its lawsuit against a client thrown out of Minnesota court for lack of jurisdiction even though the law firm had exchanged “hundreds” of communications between themselves and Turnkey, their Texas client. Regular readers of Minnesota Litigator know we have a preoccupation with the doctrine of personal jurisdiction […]

Here’s a hypothetical situation: In, say, 2010, John Doe agreed to lend a Business Partner (“BP”) money and, in exchange,  BP agreed that John Doe could mine gravel on BP’s real property in years to come. John Doe (“JD”) hired Lawyer to document this transaction in 2010. Lawyer did not have a background in documenting […]

Update (March 10, 2017): Excellent argument of the lawsuit, discussed below, earlier this week before the Minnesota Supreme Court. The concerns of the various justices of the Minnesota Supreme Court are clear. On the one hand, if Anton v. Mirviss is overruled, what is the limiting principle? How long, effectively, would the statute of limitation […]

Trademark-related litigation is a common area for disputes on the need for expert opinions. Plasti Dip™ is suing Rust-Oleum in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota (Tunheim, J.) for Rust-Oleum’s competing product, FlexiDip™. Both are rubberized coatings that can either be peeled off or left on, both sold at Home Depot, one right next […]