Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
169 results for '* industry:"Technology Media and Telecom"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2024-02-02
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Anders
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2125 EDA 2023
Plaintiff appealed the court's order dismissing her complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The court concluded that its order should be affirmed where plaintiff offered no specific facts to support her alleged claim of fraud.
Publication Date: 2023-12-18
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Insurance | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Pratter
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-030
Material dispute over company's subjective knowledge of the scope or potential scope of an investigation into its financial reporting precluded summary judgment in favor of D&O insurer on breach of contract claim. Defendant's motion for summary judgment denied in part and granted in part.
Publication Date: 2023-12-11
Practice Area: Privacy
Industry: Education | Non-Profit | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge McHugh
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-1115
Defendant moved for dismissal of plaintiff professor's false light invasion of privacy claim based on defendant's article reposting plaintiff's tweets and alleging plaintiff was the "Antisemite of the Week" and court found the article was an expression of opinion, the republished tweets did not imply the presence of undisclosed facts about plaintiff of a defamatory nature and the first amendment required dismissal of the claim. Motion granted.
Publication Date: 2023-12-04
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Todd
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19 WAP 2022
Summary document created by ShotSpotter testimony was nontestimonial in nature because its primary purpose was to assist law enforcement with responding to a potential ongoing emergency rather than to document past events for criminal prosecution, and thus the summary's admission did not violate defendant's Confrontation Clause rights. Order of the superior court affirmed.
Publication Date: 2023-11-27
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Murray
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 1300 WDA 2022
Evidence that picketers briefly blocked employer's delivery vans from leaving contractor's facility and damaged them as they left was sufficient to find that they "seized" employer's property, creating an exception to the prohibition on injunctive relief in labor actions. Order of the trial court affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Patrick S. Montoya, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-11-27
Practice Area: Internet Law
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Younge
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-cv-4185-JMY
Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiffs' consolidated class action complaint for failure to state a claim and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court denied the motion, concluding plaintiffs stated claims under the Video Privacy Protection Act and the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act where they alleged that an online digital content provider disclosed their video watching history to Facebook.
Publication Date: 2023-10-30
Practice Area: Telecommunications
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Wolson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 2:21-cv-02771-JDW
Local exchange carrier could not charge interexchange carriers tariffs for delivering toll-free calls where tariffs could only be legally imposed for services used by end users for which the local exchange carrier charged fees. Defendant's motion for summary judgment granted.
Publication Date: 2023-10-23
Practice Area: Public Records
Industry: State and Local Government | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge McCullough
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19 C.D. 2020
Office of Open Records erred in granting requester's appeal in part in action where requester sought information under the Right-to-Know Law and court found that OOR had no jurisdiction to make its determination once the confidential security information designation of the records was established on the record. Reversed.
Publication Date: 2023-10-09
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Freeman
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-3121
District Court properly dismissed insurance coverage dispute for lack of personal jurisdiction where neither party was headquartered in Delaware and the underlying policy did not cover any property or loss in Delaware.
Publication Date: 2023-10-09
Practice Area: Public Utilities
Industry: State and Local Government | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Wojcik
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 521 C.D. 2021
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission properly found plaintiff had been charged unlawfully high utility pole attachment rates and ordered a refund because PUC applied the incremental cost formula for pole attachment rates as set forth in the regulations, FCC precedent was not binding and the formula used produced an exact amount to be paid. Affirmed.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read