Update (March 7, 2019): The Minnesota Supreme Court heard argument in the Kedrowski case, described below. The question: did the trial court err in throwing the case out after a jury verdict, based on the trial judge’s conclusion that the plaintiff’s causation expert’s opinion “lacked foundational reliability.” Among other things, the Minnesota Supreme Court is […]

Update (April 4, 2019): We intended our story, below, to be an illustration of how e-discovery can  overshadow and/or complicate litigation, which, in theory, e-discovery is supposed to help resolve or simplify. The Stratasys v. Krampitz case involved alleged misappropriation of Stratasys property. Stratasys’ computer forensics expert took the position that Stratasys had evidence of […]

Update (February 27, 2019): Fitting with an “emergency” motion, U.S. Mag. Judge David Schultz lost no time in ruling on the emergency motion for sanctions, discussed below. Strictly speaking, he denied the motion but, really, he found that “sanctions are appropriate in this instance” but he denied the requested relief, granting alternative and less severe […]

It is  gratifying when a person appears to take the position that he can defy legal obligations and our court system puts him in his place. Mr. Nasser Kazeminy, a highly successful business person, seems to have found himself in this situation in connection with his son’s divorce proceedings. Mr. Nasser Kazeminy was required to […]

The pathetic thing about this week’s ruling that Plaintiff Wing does not have to pay Defendant Tricam’s claimed expert witness fees is that the two sides had been negotiating their disagreement as to responsibility for the fees and they were just $500 apart. Tricam could have accepted $500 less than it demanded from Wing. Instead, Tricam […]

Some years ago, we told the war story of a jury trial on the meaning of “operates via buoyancy,” where the two sides battled for a few weeks to persuade the jury over their respective views on the meaning of the word, “buoyancy.” After all that, it became apparent from a note sent out by […]

Updated post (February 8, 2019): One fertile patch for malpractice claims are financial transactions and a lawyer’s undisclosed conflicts of interest or breaches of fiduciary duties (the duty of loyalty, candor, confidentiality). These are common pinch-points because transactional lawyers are, in an important sense, in between parties as much as they are on one side or […]

For those of our readers who are unfamiliar with texting/Twitter acronyms/abbreviations, TIL = “Today I learned [about]….” We recently encountered this objection to an interrogatory that we had not seen before: [I]t is an impermissible “blockbuster” interrogatory which seeks to elicit every fact related to the action in one interrogatory. See Hilt v. SFC, Inc., […]

Update (January 30, 2019): In the dispute about “susceptor food packaging” or “SFP,” described below, Plaintiff Inline Packaging (“Inline”) appears to have gotten a butt-kicking (pending appeal) (link is to the U.S. District Court’s grant of the summary judgment motion of Defendant Graphic Packaging International “Graphic”). Now Graphic seeks $304,930.89 in costs, the vast bulk of […]

From the proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (“FOFCOL”) of St. Cloud State University (SCSU) after a trial before Chief Judge John R. Tunheim of the U.S. District Court (D. Minn.), we  learn that SCSU appears to be a struggling educational institution. As a result of the decline in enrollment and accompanying revenues, […]