The concept of “justice delayed is justice denied” is ancient.  But what does this broadly accepted generality mean in any particular case?  In civil litigation, there are three general time-frames:  (1) “emergency” — this is what temporary restraining orders are for; (2) “let’s cut to the chase” — that is, getting a decision or remedy short of trial, and that is what preliminary injunctive relief or sum… Continue reading →

…tion are like the costs of social conflict.  In many cases, we can get along.  Unfortunately, from time to time, we cannot. The Federal Judicial Center has sponsored a report:  ?Attorney Satisfaction with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Report to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules.   The FJC report is the result of surveys of ABA Litigation group lawyers, a plaintiff’s lawyer trade group, and an employment lawye… Continue reading →

There are eleven federally recognized Indian tribes in Minnesota.  This is not the forum for a comprehensive discussion of the interplay between Tribal Court law vs. Minnesota state law vs. United States law but, suffice it to say, as is evident from two recent decisions, almost every Minnesota civil litigator, at one time or another, will have a case or two that touches on Indian law (if it’s not wholly subsumed by it). Casinos and relate… Continue reading →

…suit in Minnesota before they lost in New York).  U.S. District Court Judge Ann Montgomery adopted Judge Graham’s Report and Recommendation.  For those interested in the complexities of federal/state substance/procedure civil procedure analysis, Judge Montgomery’s 11-page opinion sets out the analysis succinctly. … Continue reading →

Metro Gold, Inc., vs. Garrett Coin, Minn. Ct. App. A07-2117 (12/10/08) In a case notable for its strange facts, an individual wrote a check for more than $200,000 to buy gold and very shortly thereafter went into a coma, dying a few weeks later. The check bounced. Minnesota law provides for civil penalties against the issuer for a “dishonored” check. Minn. Stat. § 604.113 (2006). The statute provides for recovery of the face val… Continue reading →

On April 15, 2011, from 5:00-6:00 p.m. in the Lindquist & Vennum Conference Room at the Law School, the Federal Bar Association Chapter of the Law School will hold a panel discussion entitled, “How Do You Plead? Civil Pleading Standards Two Years After Iqbal.” The panelists will discuss the current pleading standard two years after the decision in Ashcroft et al. v. Iqbal et al. (Minnesota Litigator posts on the subject are here.) The … 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 →

A jury verdict in favor of 3M in a long-fought battle regarding claimed diminished property value due to groundwater contamination (perfluorooactonate, PFOA, a perfluorocarbon chemical used for many years in 3M products). (Pioneer Press coverage here.) The Denny Hecker bankruptcy makes the Strib front page with state investigator raids on offices and home amidst allegations of dealer sales fraud. (Pioneer Press coverage here.) The long anticipat… Continue reading →

…nment has tools at its disposal, particularly if the problem is from outside the U.S., which citizens and private companies do not have. Rank cautioned however that the feds will not want to step into what is really primarily civil litigation.  The government may suggest to a business with a cybercrime issue that it pursue the civil case first, with the U.S. coming in later if warranted.  Conversely, the government may suggest the civil litigant … Continue reading →

The Minnesota General Rules of Practice, promulgated by the Minnesota Supreme Court, set out rules for “withdrawal of counsel.”  Rule 105.  A trend has been noted of late, however, where Minnesota trial court judges impose more restrictive rules for withdrawal in the court scheduling orders, which has the result of causing some lawyers to be stuck in cases where they want to withdraw for one reason or another (most commonly, non-paym… Continue reading →