Civil Litigation Brief

APRIL 28, 2025

Today we are looking at a case where the court considered the impact of The Third Party (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010 in detail. The court decided that the insurer was not liable to indemnify a claimant who had been.

Precedent 52

Precedent Insurance Evidence 52

Complex Discovery

JULY 9, 2024

The outcome of this battle could set a critical precedent for how regulatory agencies engage with the rapidly evolving crypto market, impacting cybersecurity, information governance, and eDiscovery professionals.

Defense Strategy 122

Defense Strategy Precedent Discovery Depositions 122

WA Bar News

JUNE 11, 2024

should not be considered as evidence. a) prohibits a lawyer from using “means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person, or use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of such a person.” Irwin (E.D. Washington RPC 4.4(a) Washington RPC 3.4(a) Teck Metals, Ltd.

Depositions 98

Depositions Witnesses Objections Discovery 98

3 Geeks and a Law Blog

MARCH 20, 2023

And I sat on the idea, but when I was working as an insurance defense lawyer in Dallas, I was the only female that I saw. But what I did have happen is when I was working as an insurance defense lawyer, I had another female lawyer tell me to be very careful what I wore to court, which I still think a lot of that is true.

Media and Entertainment 64

Media and Entertainment Precedent Real Estate Technology 64

Temple University Beasley School of Law - Advocacy

JANUARY 23, 2025

In a capital [death penalty] case in Oklahoma, a wife was accused of conspiring to have her husband killed to then collect insurance proceeds. Supreme Court precedent existed. Because the Constitution matters as a check on errors in the admission or exclusion of evidence. Robinson – [link].]

Evidence 40

Evidence Admissibility Hearsay Rule Precedent 40

Practice of Law

JUNE 25, 2024

Lange was awarded $60,000 in damages, and her employer was enjoined from excluding gender-affirming care from its insurance policy. Houston County found that the challenged policy was facially discriminatory and creates precedent for the rest of the state and for the other states of the Eleventh Circuit, Florida and Alabama.

Healthcare 75

Healthcare Precedent Court Rules Insurance 75