Quinn Emanuel’s Post

On January 1, 2024, a new “streamlined trial” process replaced the summary trial process. This new streamlined trial process is intended to improve the efficiency of the justice system, increasing access to justice. Read more about the new process here: https://bit.ly/3UEy8o0 Author: Nathanael Bowles #MRoss #Employmentlaw Meritas Law Firms Worldwide

Is your head spinning? It should be if you are following the travails of the litigation challenging the CFPB’s credit card late fee litigation. Until I checked the docket entry this morning in the Fifth Circuit, I thought I had a complete handle on this case. As described in our blog earlier this week, there were two active proceedings on the Fifth Circuit. First, the CFPB petitioned for rehearing before the same panel that ruled that the District Court Judge had improperly transferred venue to the DC District Court and then held that the District Court’s failure to rule on the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction was a de facto denial of such motion , thus enabling the plaintiffs to file an interlocutory appeal. Second, the Fifth Circuit established a briefing schedule dealing with the question of whether the District Court should have granted the motion for a preliminary injunction. Today’s docket entry states: COURT ORDER remandins case to the district court Accordingly, WelVACATE the district court's effectins denial of thelmotion for preliminary injunction and REMAND with instructions that the district court rule on! the Chamber's motion for a preliminary injuction by May 10.2024. This is a limited remand. 24-102481(LBE So the case is now back in front of the same District Court judge for the limited purpose of now deciding by May 10 the motion for preliminary injunction. This is the same judge who didn’t want to keep the case and tried to transfer venue to the DC District Court only to be told to vacate his transfer order by the Fifth Circuit. The good news is that the District Court will decide the motion at least four days before the effective date of the late fee rule. If the district court denies the motion for a preliminary injunction, there will still be time to appeal the order to the fifth circuit and potentially get it reversed before the effective date. If you are a large bank covered by the rule, do you roll the dice and hope that the injunction gets granted either by the District Court or the Fifth Circuit before May 14? I think not!

As noted, last week, after a decade of discussion, the Judicial Conference voted to study litigation funding and consider disclosure rules changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Europeans, of course, have lapped us---Meanwhile, the European Law Institute published a comprehensive and thoughtful 103-page report titled "Principles Governing the Third Party Funding of Litigation (TPFL)," which seeks to objectively analyze and discuss the large and growing industry, and propose reasonable, modest measures to ensure the balance between access to capital and ethical fairness, among other things, is met. It's descriptive and thoughtful, and well worth the read. https://lnkd.in/epg9dRgf

Worth a quick read: A reminder from the Massachusetts Appeals Court about the standard of evidence required for proving a prima facie claim of legal malpractice. In Halawi Investment Trust v. Bacon, the Appeals Court emphasized that evidence demonstrating a loss of a "collectable" judgment does not need to be robust. The court highlighted that even "admissible lay opinion" about the financial condition of a potential judgment debtor can support a claim. The court clarified that a malpractice plaintiff doesn't need to prove the entire judgment was collectible, only that "something" (i.e., some amount of the judgment) was collectible and was lost due to the defendant attorney's alleged negligence. This case underscores that non-expert opinions on essential elements may suffice to clear the initial summary judgment threshold. For more details, check out the full opinion here: https://lnkd.in/dt9hgyzX #legalmalpractice #primafacie #evidence

The new business court system is facing a shortage of transactional lawyers among applicants for the 10 trial judge positions. Despite attracting candidates with judicial, litigation, and state agency experience, transactional lawyers with expertise in shareholder disputes, securities claims, and governance issues are lacking. Byron Egan, who helped draft the legislation, emphasized the critical role of transactional lawyers in these courts with The Texas Lawbook. “If you’ve been doing transactions for a period of time, you’ve invariably come across controversies. You’ve been involved in litigation. You may not be a litigator but you’re going to understand what the litigation process is, you’re going to understand what the consequences of decisions are, the importance of making quick, informed, convincing judgment of these cases.” For more insights from Byron and details on the new courts: https://lnkd.in/d-P3Cft8 #businesscourt #businesslaw #Texaslaw #Texas #TheTexasLawbook

In his latest “Arguing Class Actions” column for The National Law Journal, Founding Partner Adam Levitt discusses an often-overlooked issue in class action litigation—the rule against one way intervention. Meant to provide certainty as to which class members will be bound by a judgment, the rule bars plaintiffs from seeking class certification a class action after acquiring a favorable merits decision on their individual claims. In practice, courts have applied the rule to prevent plaintiffs from moving for summary judgment before the court decides the issue of class certification. In his article, Adam argues that a broader interpretation of one-way intervention waivers promotes fairness and hopes to spark a larger discussion about whether the rule still has a place in modern class action litigation. Read Adam's full column and consider the broader implications for class action litigation: https://bit.ly/4eB3SBQ

The public policy debate over litigation finance often overlooks that judges have repeatedly reaffirmed the benefits of third-party funding. In this New York Law Journal article, I explain this with reference to New York’s case law on litigation funding. #litigationfinance #litigationfunding #litigation ALM Certum Group https://lnkd.in/e3-hx6Nx

Texas commercial litigators—do you need a refresher on how to effectively plead, prove and recover your clients’ attorneys’ fees? This panel of Jonathan Childers, Jason Dennis, Trey Cox, Judge Dale Tillery, and Justice Bonnie Goldstein, gave the Dallas Bar‘s Business Litigation Section a master class on the topic today. As a trial attorney who is also hired as an expert to opine on reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees, I appreciated the panel’s practical guidance, such as: 1. Do not overly redact your fee statements or draft vague work descriptions. A fact finder or appellate court must be given sufficient information to justify a reasonable fee. 2. Recovery of future appellate fees must be conditional, and it is inadequate to say, “I estimate fees for representation through appeal at a Texas Court of Appeals would be $x.” The record should reflect what anticipated work would be done to support the conditional fee. 3. Pigs get fed and hogs get slaughtered. When you fail to exercise good billing judgment and refuse to segregate attorneys’ fees, you risk having your case reversed and rendered or reversed and remanded on appeal. Thank you panelists for sharing your wisdom with almost 200 lawyers who attended live or online!

This is one step in moving divorce out of the courts and into mediation. Do you have a mediation strategy to complete the divorce process, communicate your best outcome and create the financial roadmap for your future. Create a plan and consider joining TheDivorceAllies.com to learn from experts how to advocate for yourself and negotiate a global settlement. Mediation is the future of divorce. What’s your strategy?