Dentons advises The Arthritis Movement on their new AI powered app, Clara

Goodwin Procter ends agreement with recruiter who called its diversity decisions ‘shameful’

SCOTUS will consider whether Illinois congressman has standing to challenge ballot-counting law

Boycotting law clerks to pressure schools might ‘cross an important line,’ 8th Circuit chief judge says

A tragic pedestrian accident occurred on Saturday night, May 31, 2025, when a person was struck and killed by a BMW on Piner Road in Sonoma County, just outside the Santa Rosa city limits. The California Highway Patrol is investigating the circumstances surrounding this deadly collision. Details of the Piner Road Fatal Accident The fatal pedestrian accident took place at approximately 11:34 p.m. on Piner Road, east of Willowside Road. According to CHP investigators, the pedestrian was walking south across the roadway when they entered directly into the path of an eastbound BMW vehicle. The impact proved fatal, and the pedestrian was pronounced dead at the scene. Emergency responders arrived quickly, but the severity of the injuries made lifesaving efforts unsuccessful. This section of Piner Road is known for its rural characteristics, with limited street lighting and no sidewalks for pedestrian use. The area east of Willowside Road sees regular vehicle traffic but is not…

Yesterday, I shared some early figures from the UPC Court of Appeal, offering a glimpse into how the Court operates two years after its launch. But those reflections lingered long after I closed my laptop. They kept me up — long enough to return to a thornier, more theoretical question that has remained unresolved since the heated debates of 2012: If the UPC is part Rammstein (precision-engineered Teutonic riffs) and part The Clash (raw London punk energy), can it truly be considered a “court or tribunal of a Member State” within the meaning of Article 267 TFEU? Article 267 TFEU empowers “any court or tribunal of a Member State” to request preliminary rulings from the CJEU, establishing a structural and functional test that the CJEU has refined over decades of case law—Vaassen-Göbbels (Case 61/65, 30 June 1966), Nordsee (Case 102/81, 23 March 1982), CILFIT (Case 283/81, 6 October 1982), Corbiau (Case C-24/92, 30 March 1993) and…

A big rig crash on Highway 99 near Fresno has left one driver hospitalized with significant injuries, highlighting the dangerous consequences of reckless driving and the importance of highway safety measures. The Saturday evening crash involved a Ford Taurus that struck a stopped commercial truck at high speed, demonstrating how quickly traffic situations can turn deadly. Details of the Highway 99 Collision The accident occurred on the southbound shoulder of Highway 99 near Fresno Street when a Ford Taurus driver, reportedly operating the vehicle recklessly, crashed into the rear of a stopped big rig trailer. According to the California Highway Patrol (CHP), the commercial truck had pulled over due to mechanical issues and was legally positioned on the highway shoulder when the collision occurred. The impact caused significant damage to the Ford Taurus, and the driver, who was not wearing a seatbelt at the time of the crash, sustained significant injuries requiring immediate…

[Justice Kavanaugh: “this Court should and presumably will address the AR–15 issue soon.”] After fifteen re-listings, on June 2 the Supreme Court denied cert in Snope v. Brown, which concerns Maryland's ban on semiautomatic rifles, and Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island, which concerns Rhode Island's magazine ban.  I previously discussed these cases here. Cert denial in Ocean State was more predictable, even though Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch would have granted the petition, as it sought review of denial of a preliminary injunction.  But in Snope (styled Bianchi v. Brown in the 4th Circuit) – which has a final judgment based on a full record –Justices Alito and Gorsuch are listed as having been in the "would have granted" category, with Justice Thomas writing a dissent from denial.  The big news is that Justice Kavanaugh issued a statement in Snope concluding that "this Court should and presumably…

I’m thinking of heading back to Chicago in a couple of weeks for Legal Geek North America—a one-day conference on Tuesday, June 17. I’d make a week of it to meet with clients and partners. Legal Geek has its roots in London, where I first attended back in 2018. Unlike legal conferences in hotels and convention centers, Recess, in Chicago is a sprawling indoor-outdoor space in the West Loop that leans more creative agency than corporate. It’s billed as “a playground for grown-ups.” Glib, but well described for the small plywood stands for exhibitors, small stages and beer next door, afterwards, that I experienced in London.  The format of brief TED-style talks and roundtables unfold in close to twenty five sessions. With an impressive group of over forty authorities, over fifteen of the sessions are dedicated to AI.  Alicia Hawley of K&L Gates says “Legal Geek allows a casual and…

A tragic intersection collision in Shasta County has resulted in the death of a 34-year-old Cottonwood man after his electric scooter was struck by a pickup truck on Saturday, May 31, 2025. The fatal accident occurred at the Gas Point Road and Park Drive intersection, highlighting ongoing safety concerns for electric scooter riders sharing roadways with larger vehicles. Details of the Shasta County Electric Scooter Accident According to the California Highway Patrol, the collision occurred when a Ford pickup truck traveling westbound on Gas Point Road approached the intersection at Park Drive. Simultaneously, the 34-year-old victim rode his electric scooter southbound on Park Drive and entered the intersection directly in front of the oncoming truck. The impact between the Ford pickup and the electric scooter was severe, with the rider found beneath the vehicle following the collision. The pickup truck driver immediately stopped on the north shoulder of Gas Point Road and…

Global law firm Dentons has advised Medien Union, based in Ludwigshafen, Germany, on the split-up of Südwestdeutsche Medien Holding (SWMH). Corporate, Corporate in Germany, Competition and Antitrust, Competition and Antitrust in Germany, Tax, Tax in Germany, Europe, Germany, Berlin

In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the Supreme Court is poised to clarify the legal standard for evaluating reverse discrimination claims. Put simply, the court will decide how discrimination claims brought by individuals belonging to historically advantaged or “majority” groups (such as white, male or heterosexual individuals) should be assessed under U.S. law. By Katharine W. Fogarty and Gabrielle Talvacchia, Kaufman Dolowich LLP June 2, 2025 Several compelling cases are currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. However, as legal professionals await the court’s anticipated rulings next month, one case in particular has garnered significant attention among labor and employment attorneys nationwide. In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, 87 F.4th 822 (6th Cir. 2023), cert. granted, 145 S. Ct. 118 (2024), the Supreme Court is poised to clarify the legal standard for evaluating reverse discrimination claims. Put simply, the court will decide how…

This post was authored by Natasha Dasani, Esq. In November 2022, a ballot initiative which permitted and regulated recreational marijuana establishments within the Township of Royal Oak was approved by a majority of voters in the township. The ballot initiative was presented to voters by the Oakland Cares Coalition (OCC), and plaintiff, collectively members of the township’s governing board, sought to block the proposal through a series of unsuccessful lawsuits prior to the election. The ballot initiative indicated that “[t]he proposal, if adopted, would enact an ordinance to assist patients in need of medical marihuana for conditions such as epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, . . . and other critical medical conditions and repeal the Township’s prohibition of marihuana establishments. Shall the proposal be adopted?” Based on the language of the ballot initiative, plaintiff argued that “the ballot question was misleading, as it implied that the…

Richard A. Bales (Ohio Northern University - Pettit College of Law) has posted Contracting Around the FAA: The Enforceability of Private Agreements to Expand Judicial Review of Arbitration Awards on SSRN. Here is the abstract: This article argues that courts should enforce private contractual agreements for expanded judicial review in arbitration agreements. This article demonstrates that the court decisions enforcing such arbitral contractual provisions are consistent with the FAA’s purpose to ensure enforcement of parties’ arbitral agreements, whatever the form. Furthermore, this article argues that the FAA does not preclude courts from reviewing awards under expanded grounds where parties so agree, because the statutory structure provides default rather than mandatory grounds for award vacatur. Finally, this article concludes that permitting the parties to contract for expanded judicial review serves the public policy favoring arbitration, insofar as it…

 Pix credit hereMy friend and colleague Anne Wagner (Lille) has undertaken an extraordinarily ambitious and necessary project-- The International Handbook of Legal Language and Communication--all volumes to be published by Springer in the coming years. As the press release notes:This comprehensive 10-volume handbook features up to 900 entries from leading experts worldwide, making it the most extensive resource in the field of legal language, semiotics, and communication. The international handbook is designed to integrate perspectives from a wide range of jurisdictions globally, ensuring its relevance across diverse legal systems and contexts. This unique international handbook provides in-depth coverage of key topics related to legal language and communication, from foundational principles to cutting-edge developments.The breadth of subjects covered is quite broad (see here). In connection with that project, Gabriele Aroni, (Senior Lecturer in Game Arts at…

When a couple decides to divorce, one of the first financial questions that often comes up is: What happens to our joint bank account? Whether it’s a checking or savings account, a joint account is typically treated as marital property under Florida law. But that doesn’t mean it’s always split right down the middle. If you’re divorcing in Orlando or anywhere in Central Florida, here’s what you should know about joint bank accounts and how they’re handled during divorce. Joint Accounts Are Usually Marital Property In Florida, most property acquired during the marriage is considered marital property, and that includes joint bank accounts, even if only one spouse deposited most of the money. Courts generally assume that both spouses have an equal interest in the account, unless there’s a clear agreement or evidence showing otherwise. That said, equitable distribution doesn’t always mean a 50/50 split. Instead, the court…

Wisconsin offers a property tax credit for 100% disabled veterans and surviving spouses. Learn eligibility rules, how to claim it, and what qualifies as a primary residence. | O'Flaherty Law - Learn About Law Legal Articles, Videos & Podcasts with O'Flaherty Law

(Photo by Fran Santiago/Getty Images)“You’re welcome to do dealings with foreign governments when it makes sense, but don’t go accepting compromising deals as their agents or get knighted or something.” Not only is this some simple advice, it is echoed constitutionally in the emoluments clause! Now, was incorporating this sentiment in our supreme document enough to prevent Trump from accepting a $400M totally-not-a-bribe plane from Qatar or Justice Alito becoming a Constantinian knight? No, but it is enough for the German government to take notice of how ripe the ground for foul play is in the land of the free. The German Bar Association took it upon themselves to remind German lawyers of their ethical responsibilities — especially if their work involved one of the Yellow-Bellied Nine. Law.com has coverage: German lawyers who work with any of the nine U.S. law firms that made deals with the Trump administration could be in breach of the German…

Can a contractor refuse partial payment? Learn how accord and satisfaction works under construction contracts, and when a material breach can justify withholding payment. | O'Flaherty Law - Learn About Law Legal Articles, Videos & Podcasts with O'Flaherty Law