California law recognizes some customer lists as trade secrets. But not all of them.
- Protecting Customer Lists as Trade Secrets
- Looking Back at ‘Daubert’
- Experts, Hearsay, and the ‘Sanchez’ Case
- Representing Joint Clients (Special Credit)
- What’s Said in the Trustee’s Office Stays in the Trustee’s Office
- Is a Non-Party’s Contact Information Private?
- Mindfulness: What to Do When the Need for Help Arises (Special Credit)
Almost 25 years ago, a key U.S. Supreme Court decision set the standard for the admissibility of expert testimony in federal court. An expert looks back on that venerable precedent.
The California Supreme Court has clarified when an expert can rely on hearsay—and when the expert can tell a jury about it.
The California Environmental Quality Act sometimes conflicts with federal law. And sometimes not.
Judges in their own words
“I write separately to explain why it is unfair for the Government to encourage noncitizens to apply for immigration relief, and at a later date use statements in those relief applications against noncitizens in removal proceedings…..The Government’s practice in this regard contradicts the principle of welcoming immigrants into our communities….We should encourage, not punish, noncitizens who come out of the shadows seeking avenues to lawful status.”
— Ninth Circuit judge Harry Pregerson, concurring in Sanchez v. Sessions, 2017 WL 3723238 (9th Cir.). The court terminated removal proceedings against Luis Sanchez after concluding that government officials “committed an egregious Fourth Amendment violation and violated an immigration regulation because they seized Sanchez based on his Latino ethnicity alone.”
Trends in Antitrust
- Are Desktops Better for Law Firm Lawyers?
- Engage! A Lawyer’s Guide to Social Media Marketing
- IRS Changes Position, Will Not Accept Tax Returns Which Are Silent On Healthcare Coverage
- “Pretty Sure Stank Is Patented,” Lawyer Claims—But It’s Complicated
- Financial Times to "the Patent Troll Narrative" -- Much Ado About Nothing