One of the many procedural niceties of civil litigation that escapes the attention of most people almost always, and even many lawyers often, is the timing for enforcing judgments.  When do I see the $$$? If I win at the trial court on a claim that comes with attorneys’ fees, can I be awarded attorneys’ fees while the other side is taking an appeal?  If I win an award of sanctions against the other side, can I collect that before the… Continue reading →

Plaintiff in Hart Security v. Number One Health (Middle East) et al. entered into a settlement with Defendant Gary Butters but, as sometimes happens, Butters does not appear to have been very eager to actually pay the settlement. Plaintiff’s counsel brought this to the Court’s attention with a motion to enforce the settlement agreement, seeking an award of its attorneys’ fees for the expense of having to bring the motion.  U. S… Continue reading →

…edly note that Schaub’s counsel could well have been motivated “pro money” rather than “pro bono” (and, in the end, was successful in his goal).  Minnesota Litigator is in no position to know the attorneys’ personal motivations.  Regardless, Schaub’s lawyers obviously took a very hard case and, assuming the judgment was sound (and it was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit), preva… Continue reading →

Update (2/17/2011):  Another sanction affirmed, this time against a disbarred lawyer proceeding pro se.  (And it’s another caning by Carver County Judge Philip T. Kanning…) Original post (1/13/2011):  Noting a second affirmance of a Minnesota trial court’s sanctioning a lawyer by the Minnesota Court of Appeals this week, caused Minnesota Litigator to pose the question, above.   I note, in particular, that the failure at the tri… Continue reading →

…onstructing the proposed 450-foot tower, while noting that construction of an unlighted 199-foot cell tower would be permissible. The decision also demonstrates the power that Minnesota citizens can wield by acting as private attorneys general under MERA, if they can find a way to foot the bill for litigation costs.  More details on the case after the jump… Some highlights from the FBWW findings of fact: -          Scenic View Impairment: A… Continue reading →

The interesting fact pattern that gives rise to the problem in this case is what are the duties of a generic drug manufacturer if, after a drug’s initial federal approval (and approval (and then mandated use) of a specific warning label), new information comes to light about potentially harmful side effects?  Can a claim be brought against the manufacturer under state law for failure to warn? Gloria Mensing took a medicine, MCP, a gene… Continue reading →

…s of the drug, an antibiotic. Levaquin included a warning but sometime after Schedin’s incident, the warning was changed and made more prominent (made into a “black box” warning in 2008).  Subsequent warning label changes would be a classic “subsequent remedial measure” inadmissible at trial if it were not for the fact that the label change was mandated by the FDA, U.S. District Court Judge John R. Tunheim has held. … Continue reading →