Business
[07/02] Asian stocks lackluster as traders eye US job data
[07/02] ECB keeps interest rate at 1 pct
[07/02] Computer problems delay United flights at O'Hare
More...

Top Headlines
[07/02] DEA joins Michael Jackson death probe
[07/02] As deficit grows, Calif. prepares to issue IOUs
[07/02] Companies pledge more openness about Web tracking
More...

Government Contracts

[06/29] Am. Contractors Indem. Co. v. US
In a breach of contract action brought pursuant to the Tucker Act, Court of Federal Claims judgment is reversed and remanded where the court erred in dismissing plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim, as the effective date of a surety bond is not necessarily the date of agreement or acquiescence within the meaning of 13 C.F.R. sec. 115.19(e).
More...

Intellectual Property

[07/02] Marshak v. Treadwell
In an action related to a trademark dispute involving the singing group "The Drifters," district court judgment is affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part where: 1) the court did not err in issuing contempt findings against the plaintiffs as they reassembled plaintiff's business under different names in order to evade the injunction issued by the district court judge; 2) the court erred in holding co-plaintiff Revels in contempt, as defendant never actually moved for him to be held in contempt, and he thus never obtained notice and a separate hearing; and 3) the court properly awarded defendant attorney's fees, but abused its discretion in refusing to impose any remedy other than attorney's fees, as plaintiff continued to evade the injunction and infringe the trademark. The matter is remanded for an order of accounting of plaintiff's profits.
More...

Labor & Employment Law

[07/02] Hughes v. Pair
Court of Appeals judgment for defendant in a sexual harassment action is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's factual allegations fail to establish the severe or pervasive conduct necessary to pursue a claim of hostile environment sexual harassment under Civil Code sec. 51.9, as the conduct was not so egregious as to alter the conditions of the underlying professional relationship and could not plausibly be construed by a reasonable trier of fact as a threat to commit a sexual assault on plaintiff; and 2) the court properly granted summary judgment on plaintiff's claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress as plaintiff failed to establish either extreme or outrageous conduct by defendant or that plaintiff suffered severe or extreme emotional distress.
More...