More than a dozen groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Financial Services Association and Financial Services Roundtable, filed a lawsuit Sept. 29 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s new rule, finalized in July.
At issue before the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division 3, is the sequence in which Montrose Chemical Corporation of California may access its excess comprehensive general liability, or CGL, policies to cover its liability for the environmental injuries caused by the chemical dichlorodiphenyltrichlorethane, also known as DDT.
Litigation over length of Subway’s footlong sandwiches to continue; plaintiffs say they plan to pursue case
The plaintiffs filed their notice of termination of settlement agreement days after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit’s Aug. 25 decision. The Seventh Circuit reversed the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin’s decision certifying a proposed class and approving a settlement in the case, calling it “utterly worthless.”
Filed in a Connecticut federal court last week, the lawsuit alleges the photos, taken while the plaintiff was on Miami Beach for spring break, suggest she used drugs and engaged in sexual acts. The plaintiff, a Connecticut college student, contends she never consented to the pictures, which were used in a series of articles about spring break on the defendants’ websites.
California attorney Michael Mandelbrot appealed from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California’s affirmance of an order that enforces a stipulated agreement between him and the J.T. Thorpe Settlement Trust, among others. The trusts, following an investigation, had concluded that Mandelbrot engaged in a pattern of submitting “unreliable evidence.”
The plaintiffs, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, and Biotechnology Innovation Organization, or BIO, filed their lawsuit against Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval and the head of the state’s Department of Health and Human Services in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada Sept. 1. They allege Senate Bill 539, signed into law by Sandoval in June, will violate patent rights and negate trade secret protection for designated diabetes medicines.
In June, the U.S. Department of Labor published a Request for Information, or RFI, related to the rule and whether to delay its full implementation. The rule, released in April 2016, mandates financial professionals who service individual retirement accounts, including IRAs and 401(k) plans, to serve the “best interest” of the savers and disclose conflicts of interest.