article thumbnail

Dismissal of Defamation and False Light Claim under Tennessee Public Participation Act partially reversed.

Day on Torts

M2021-00878-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 4490980 (Tenn. 28, 2022), plaintiff was a real estate professional involved in some capacity with Durham Farms, which was a large residential community. Having found that the TPPA applied, the Court moved on to considering whether plaintiff had shown a prima facie case for each element of his two claims.

article thumbnail

Proper analysis for petition to dismiss under Tennessee Public Participation Act (TPPA).

Day on Torts

When a litigant has filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act (TPPA), that motion should be analyzed under the provisions of the TPPA rather than under the traditional Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12 analysis. E2021-01513-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 16559447 (Tenn. In Reiss v. quoting Tenn. Code Ann. §

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Jury Instructions and Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness: Federal Circuit Grants New Trial in Inline Plastics v. Lacerta

Patently O

The case, Inline Plastics Corp. 2022-1954 (Fed. Role of Jury Instructions and Objective Indicia In American civil litigation, jury instructions are the set of legal rules and guidelines provided to the jury by the trial judge before the jury begins deliberations. Lacerta Group, LLC , No.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court on Patent Law: November 2023

Patently O

Vidal (No 23-135): This case challenges the “ Fintiv rule” that restricts the initiation of inter partes review in cases where parallel district court litigation is pending. 23-315): This case questions the Federal Circuit’s interpretation of time limits for joining IPR partes. 1713 (2022).

Court 73
article thumbnail

New rules on service outside Australia for the Federal Court of Australia

Conflict of Laws

The Federal Court Legislation Amendment Rules 2022 (Cth) (‘Amendment Rules’) came into force on 13 January 2023. Leave to serve turned on three conditions: the court had subject matter jurisdiction, the claim was of a kind mentioned in the rules, and the party had a prima facie case for any or all of the relief claimed: FCR r 10.43(4).

Court 40
article thumbnail

Denial of Natural Justice as a Defence to Enforcement of a Chinese Judgment in Australia

Conflict of Laws

On 22 October 2021, summary judgment was entered in favour of Wu by an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court: Wu v Yin (Supreme Court of Victoria, Efthrim AsJ, 22 October 2021); see Wu v Yin [2022] VSC 729, [5]. Tsalamandris J rejected this ground, and Yin’s appeal: [2022] VSC 729, [124], [133].

article thumbnail

Obviousness and Pharmaceutical Method of Treatment Claims

Patently O

2022-1258 (Fed. The case involved Janson’s U.S. In the ensuing Hatch-Waxman litigation, Teva stipulated to infringement but challenged the patent on obviousness and indefiniteness grounds. Janssen Pharms., Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. , Following a bench trial Judge Cecchi (D.N.J.)