X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
VOGEL SIGNS ON WITH JAMS IN L.A. Justice Charles Vogel is joining alternative dispute resolution provider JAMS after an 11-year stint at Los Angeles’ Second District Court of Appeal. Vogel will serve as an arbitrator and mediator at JAMS, where he began working Monday. Larry Gennaro, the vice president of JAMS’ Southwest region, said Vogel’s background as a lawyer and a jurist will make him a strong neutral. “His reputation for being fair and impartial is well known to the bench and bar,” said Gennaro in a statement. “He is smart, focused and quick to get to the core of a dispute.” Vogel, who has served as the president of the California State Bar and chair of the Supreme Court’s Advisory Committee on the code of judicial ethics, announced his retirement from the bench in December. A graduate of UCLA School of Law, the 71-year-old Vogel spent many years as a superior court judge in Los Angeles and in private practice as a litigation partner. In 1993 he was appointed to the Second District by then-Gov. Pete Wilson. — Alexei Oreskovic BIRD’S-EYE CAMERA GOT SUPER BOWL OK PHILADELPHIA — Sure, the Philadelphia Eagles didn’t go to the Super Bowl this year, but a federal judge in Philadelphia nonetheless played a key role in how the entire nation watched the game by refusing to issue an injunction in a patent lawsuit that would have barred the use of an aerial camera. In his 22-page opinion in CF InFlight Ltd. v. Cablecam Systems Ltd., U.S. District Judge Legrome Davis concluded that the plaintiff — which holds the patent for the “Skycam” aerial camera system — had failed to show that it is likely to win a patent infringement claim against the makers of the “Multi-V” camera suspension system. Since the patent case is likely to hinge on issues of claim construction, Davis said, the court must first hold a Markman hearing. “In order to conclusively resolve the dispute with respect to either the literal infringement or infringement under the doctrine of equivalents . . . this court would need to engage in a claim construction analysis,” Davis wrote. “While CF InFlight has made a reasonable showing of validity and infringement of the . . . patent, Cablecam has also provided evidence of invalidity and non-infringement sufficient to require further exploration of these issues through a proper claim construction hearing. As such, the presumption of irreparable harm cannot extend, and the court turns its inquiry to the substantive arguments of irreparable harm.” Davis also concluded that the defendant would suffer more from an injunction than the plaintiff would suffer from not winning an injunction. “If an injunction is issued, Cablecam will be forced to breach its contract with CBS,” Davis wrote. — Legal Intelligencer ALLSTATE VICTORIOUS IN ANTI-LAWYER EFFORT HARTFORD, Conn. — Despite state unfair trade laws and a recent statute specifically crafted to prevent Allstate Insurance Co. from discouraging accident victims from hiring lawyers, the Northbrook, Ill.-based insurer’s anti-lawyer tactics are winning the stamp of approval from Connecticut’s federal courts. U.S. District Judge Christopher Droney ruled Jan. 20 for Allstate on claims it breached an implied contract of good faith and fair dealing, and was engaging in unfair trade practice, unfair insurance practice, recklessness and fraud. In June 1998, Allstate sent plaintiff Donald Hipsky a copy of its “Quality Service Pledge” after Hipsky had an accident with an Allstate insured. The brochure was a milder version of the “Do You Need an Attorney?” campaign that Allstate launched in many states in the mid-1990s. The pledge stated that “[b]ecause you have been in an accident with an Allstate policyholder, we will provide you with quality service.” It also said Allstate would investigate the accident fairly and quickly, and make “an appropriate offer of compensation” for Hipsky’s injuries if he “qualified.” Furthermore, Hipsky alleged that an Allstate claims representative, Deborah Schwager, discouraged him from seeking legal counsel, telling him an attorney would merely reduce the net amount of his settlement. Allstate offered $3,500 and a “final” offer of $4,000 in June 1999. Hipsky then hired a lawyer, and settled for $25,000 two years later. Stafford Springs solo Brian Newman represented Hipsky, in a case that tracked a similar action brought against Allstate’s QSP by New London plaintiffs’ attorney Robert Reardon. — Connecticut Law Tribune

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.