Because jurisdictions vary widely in their treatment of deposition break conferences, practitioners should not assume that conversations with clients during deposition breaks will be covered by attorney-client privilege.
In the October 12, 2023 Edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward Kang wrote “Jurisdiction Matters: Things to Consider Before Consulting With Clients During Depositions“. Continue reading ›
On Friday, November 3, 2023, Kandis L. Kovalsky joins fellow panelists Taylor Brown, Counsel and Practice Lead at IBM, and Geeta Taylor, Senior Counsel in the Office of Counsel to the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, in New Orleans to present, “When Grants Go Bad and False Claims Arise.” Continue reading ›
Philadelphia, PA (September 8, 2023): Ross M. Wolfe, an associate at Kang Haggerty LLC, was recently named the Young Republican National Federation’s (YRNF) 2023 Man of the Year during the organization’s bi-annual convention, held in Dallas, Texas. Continue reading ›
Although Rule 408 does preclude some settlement evidence from being admitted in litigation, it is a mistake, and potentially a dangerous one, to believe that any documents or communications bearing the label of “For Settlement Purposes Only” will necessarily fall within the scope of Rule 408. Lawyers must have a clear understanding of the limitations to Rule 408’s protection of settlement evidence.
In the August 31, 2023 Edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward Kang wrote “Not a Blanket Protection: Understanding Limits of Protections for Settlement Evidence“. Continue reading ›
Kang Haggerty LLC is proud to have two lawyers recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® and two lawyers recognized in the Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America 2024 editions. Congratulations to Henry J. Donner, Gregory H. Mathews, Kandis L. Kovalsky and Kyle T. Garabedian. Continue reading ›
Ethical issues in e-discovery arise due to the unique challenges and the complex nature of electronic data. The ethical challenges presented demand careful consideration and require lawyers to remain competent in emerging technology and the implications on e-discovery.
In the August 10, 2023 Edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Kelly Lavelle wrote “Beware of Ethical Issues in Today’s E-Discovery Landscape.” Continue reading ›
Courts will likely be grappling with questions regarding cryptocurrency for years to come—with the results from the suits against Binance and Coinbase potentially serving as guiding precedent in answering those questions.
In the July 6, 2023 Edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang and Kandis L. Kovalsky co-authored, “Emerging ‘Securities’ Litigation in Cryptocurrency.” Continue reading ›
The front page of The Philadelphia Inquirer’s business section on June 10, 2023, features an article from reporter Joseph N. DiStefano, “Vanguard and former tax lawyer are in mediation over wrongful termination lawsuit,” detailing the status of former Vanguard attorney David Danon’s whistleblower lawsuit against Vanguard. Continue reading ›
ESI often contains confidential data, such as trade secrets, financial information, and personal data, and attorneys need to be aware of their obligations to protect this information and prevent unauthorized disclosure.
In the June 8, 2023 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Kelly A. Lavelle wrote “Safeguarding Data Privacy in the E-Discovery Process.” Continue reading ›
On June 1, 2023, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion (authored by Justice Clarence Thomas), providing a long-awaited answer to the question of whether, under the Federal Claims Act (“FCA”), a defendant “knowingly” submits a false claim by reporting its retail cash price as its “usual and customary price” rather than the lower and more-common price offered through discount programs. The Seventh Circuit twice held that such reporting is not a “knowingly” false claim under the FCA because “a reasonable person” could reach a similar interpretation of “usual and customary price.” United States v. Supervalu Inc., 9 F.4th 455 (7th Cir. 2021); United States ex rel. Proctor v. Safeway, Inc., 30 F.4th 649 (7th Cir. 2022). The Supreme Court vacated the Seventh Circuit’s judgments and ruled that the FCA scienter requirement refers to a defendant’s knowledge and subjective beliefs – not to what an objectively reasonable person may have known or believed. United States ex rel. Shutte v. SuperValu Inc., 598 U.S. (2023) The Court also determined that facially ambiguous language is not a sufficient reason to prohibit a finding that a defendant knew its claims were false. Continue reading ›
Kang Haggerty News