Westlaw Journals weekly round-up

August 21, 2013

Westlaw Journals Weekly RoundupThe new Westlaw Journals blog brings you litigation headlines in over 30 substantive areas of law. Here are some highlights from the past week:


Post-DOMA, judge finds same-sex spouse rightful heir to employee death benefit: Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s June decision declaring parts of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional, a Pennsylvania federal judge has ruled that a woman is entitled to benefits provided under the profit-sharing plan of her deceased same-sex spouse’s employer. U.S. District Judge C. Darnell Jones of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania said July 29 that under the high court’s DOMA ruling, Sarah Farley and Jennifer Tobits were viewed as legally married under federal law. (Employment)

Insurer in Philly building collapse says contractor’s coverage is void: A demolition contractor facing lawsuits from people injured in a deadly Philadelphia building collapse is not entitled to insurance coverage because of certain misrepresentations and omissions in his application documents, Berkley Assurance Co. says. The insurer alleges in a complaint filed in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Aug. 5 that Griffin Campbell’s policy was invalid before the June 5 collapse because he allegedly lied about both his history and the details of the demolition project in his insurance application. (Insurance Coverage)

Fan can pursue class action over alleged NFL apparel monopoly: A football fan can proceed with a nationwide class action that alleges the National Football League’s exclusive licensing agreement with Reebok for NFL-branded apparel unlawfully violated antitrust laws, a California federal judge ruled Aug. 2. U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila of the Northern District of California denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, concluding that Patrick Dang adequately identified a relevant antitrust market and that he suffered an antitrust injury. (Entertainment Industry)

Anti-SEC group weighs in on securities case before Supreme Court: In a dispute before the U.S. Supreme Court, the advocacy group Occupy the SEC has filed an amicus brief in support of investors trying to sue in state court to recover their losses arising from R. Allen Stanford’s Ponzi scheme. Occupy the SEC is part of the New York-based Occupy Wall Street movement and is comprised of financial professionals, concerned citizens and activists, according to its July 25 brief. (Securities Litigation & Regulation)