Fox Rothschild LLP is a national law firm with 950 attorneys practicing in 26 offices coast to coast. We’ve been serving clients for more than a century, and we’ve been climbing the ranks of the nation’s largest firms for many years, according to both The Am Law 100 and The National Law Journal.
By Jeff MacHarg and Camryn Rohr
To practitioners familiar with internal disputes involving closely held companies, the allegations in Lafayette Village Pub, LLC v. Burnham, 2025 NCBC 8, are nothing new. The member running the business (allegedly) made bad, self-interested decisions. The other members complained, and eventually litigation ensued.
Evaluating these disputes should almost…
State government plaintiffs in cases against PFAS manufacturers have adopted the strategy of filing parallel complaints in state court – one for recovery for contamination caused by PFAS in AFFF and a second for potentially comingled PFAS contamination caused by PFAS from consumer and other non-AFFF products. One reason for doing so: attempting to keep…
As wearable technology continues to evolve, smart glasses are becoming an increasingly popular accessory. While these devices offer numerous benefits, they also present unique legal challenges, particularly in California, where privacy and workplace safety are paramount. Employers must navigate these issues carefully to ensure compliance with applicable laws and maintain a safe and respectful work…
The office of the Oregon Attorney General recently releases a six-month enforcement report regarding the Oregon’s Consumer Privacy Act (OCPA).
What are we discussing with our clients?
…
In this third installment in our Aviation Symposium series of blog posts, we present the materials from the panel on Flight Attendants and Customer Service Agents: Risks and Liabilities. Our guest panelists included several airline executives, aviation attorneys, insurers and aviation safety experts.
The focus of the panel was on the increased threat environment facing…
Appellate Division addressed standard for addressing the issue of modifying alimony based upon retirement in pre-2014 divorces – highlighting again the issue of whether the recipient did or could have saved for retirement…
In a recent precedential cancellation decision, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) partially granted Respondent’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the parties’ stipulation that prior proceedings between them be dismissed “WITH PREJUDICE, with CONSENT of both parties, and without the entry of judgment against either party,” was sufficient to support a claim preclusion…
Is the EU AI Act a Jenga piece that can easily be removed from the regulatory tower?
Here are some key points from the “AI Regulation – a critical comment” workshop at the Alpine Privacy Days Conference, courtesy of Florent Thouvenin, Professor of Information and Communications Law, The Faculty of Law of the University of…
Introduction
Consider the following scenarios: A customer repeatedly enters your company’s workplace, berates your employees, uses profanity, and then leaves. (Let’s call her “Cruella.”) Or perhaps a customer consistently comes in and asks your employees out on dates, tells them about his sexual prowess, won’t take no for an answer, and refuses to leave the…
Only two months into 2025, and the Business Court has already denied two motions for leave to add claims to pierce the corporate veil. My fellow-Foxer, Brad Risinger reported here on the first opinion from Judge Earp in MD Claims Grp., LLC v. Bagley, 2025 NCBC 2. The very next day, in CTS Metrolina,…
