News » Uncategorized

Articles Posted in Uncategorized

|

For practitioners who bring civil RICO or antitrust claims under statutes that authorize nationwide service of process, the decision matters a great deal. Although the decision was unanimous as to the result and broad in its reasoning, the court declined to provide a precise test for what the Fifth Amendment now requires, leaving lower courts to resolve the boundaries as the law settles.

In the July 21, 2026 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward Kang writes, “A New Reach for RICO and Antitrust Plaintiffs: Personal Jurisdiction After ‘Fuld v. PLO’.” Continue reading ›

|

In the June 19, 2025 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Kelly Lavelle writes, “Revisiting ‘Zubulake’ 20 Years Later.”

Introduction

It has been 20 years since Judge Shira A. Scheindlin issued the landmark Zubulake decisions, a series of rulings that profoundly reshaped e-discovery practices in federal litigation. At a time when electronically stored information (ESI) was rapidly expanding and began to overwhelm traditional discovery practices, Zubulake addressed critical issues related to preservation, production, and cost-allocation. These decisions expanded the definition of ESI, established new standards for attorney oversight, and set a precedent for holding both parties and their attorneys accountable for failing to fulfill their e-discovery obligations. This article revisits Zubulake and explores its enduring impact on e-discovery standards and practices, as well as the significant developments that have occurred since these pivotal decisions.

Continue reading ›

|

In the April 17, 2025 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang writes, “Civil RICO Gets Personal—Supreme Court Allows Recovery of Economic Harm Deriving From Personal Injury.”

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Medical Marijuana v. Horn expands the reach of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), clarifying that injuries to business or property that derive from personal injuries may, under some circumstances, constitute a compensable injury. Historically, courts have read RICO’s civil enforcement provisions narrowly, excluding economic losses deriving from personal injury. Horn reverses this trend, opening new possibilities for plaintiffs for recovery.

Continue reading ›

|

Until the circuit split regarding Rule 34 “control” over ESI possessed by a third party is resolved, determining an employer’s obligation to preserve and produce ESI contained on an employee’s personal mobile device that is used for work-related purposes will remain murky waters.

In the October 24, 2024 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Beth Hurley wrote, “An Employer’s Rule 34 ‘Possession, Custody and Control’ Over ESI on ‘BYOD’ Devices.” Continue reading ›

|

With strict adherence to regulatory requirements and a commitment to producing safe and effective products, THC-infused beverage companies can take advantage of interstate commerce, standard banking and payment processing solutions, and e-commerce marketing tools.

In the May 7, 2024 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Justin Serianni wrote, “High Hopes for Hemp Derived THC-Infused Beverages.” Continue reading ›

|

There are avenues through which parties can seek recovery of e-discovery expenses. Parties should understand the basis upon which courts will allow recovery of these costs and establish reasonable limits on the scope of discovery at the beginning of the litigation process.

In the January 26, 2024 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Kelly Lavelle wrote, “Strategies for Successful Recovery of E-Discovery Expenses.” Continue reading ›

|

Depp-v-Heard-1024x538Beyond the substantive legal matters at issue, one procedural aspect of the trial has also generated significant attention; namely, that the entire proceeding was livestreamed for the public. We discuss below the pros and cons of such coverage, the history of recording devices in courtrooms, as well as provide recommendations for balancing the countervailing concerns at issue.

In the June 16, 2022 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang co-authored, “‘Depp v. Heard’: Public Trials and the Social Media Era.” Continue reading ›

Contact Information
Philadelphia Office
123 S Broad St #1950
Philadelphia, PA 19109
Phone: (215) 525-5850
New Jersey Office
10000 Lincoln Dr E #201
Marlton, NJ 08053
Phone: (856) 266-9330
We serve clients throughout the Delaware Valley including, but not limited to, those in the following localities: Pennsylvania including Berks County, Bucks County, Chester County, Delaware County, Montgomery County, and Philadelphia County; New Jersey including Atlantic County, Burlington County, Camden County, Cape May County, Cumberland County, Gloucester County, Salem County, and Mercer County; Delaware including Kent County and New Castle County; and Maryland including Cecil County. We also serve clients in New York. View More

California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) Opt-Out IconYour Privacy Choices Cookie Policy Manage Cookies

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2026, Kang Haggerty LLC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design