León Cosgrove

Featured News

Client Alert: 28 U.S.C. § 1782 y el Arbitraje Internacional; Herramienta Esencial Para el Litigante Extranjero

By: Derek E. León

Desde hace más de cincuenta años, el marco legal de Estados Unidos ha ofrecido a litigantes extranjeros una herramienta eficaz para recaudar pruebas al estilo americano (lo que en Estados Unidos llamamos discovery), en apoyo a procedimientos extranjeros. Concisamente, la ley de Estados Unidos, a través de 28 U.S.C. § 1782 (“la sección 1782”)[1] permite a litigantes extranjeros recaudar pruebas de terceras partes ubicadas en Estados Unidos para su uso en un procedimiento legal extranjero. Para ilustrar:

Continue Reading

Third DCA revives line of cases allowing early review—through writs of prohibition—of trial court’s res judicata and collateral estoppel decisions

By: Garrett Nemeroff

The Third DCA’s recent decision in Cozen O’Connor, PLC v. Mintz Truppman, P.A. revives a line of cases allowing parties to file writs of prohibition when a trial court denies a motion to dismiss raising collateral estoppel – but only when the prior adjudication occurred in federal court. Nos. 3D18-1976, 3D18-1975, 2020 WL 3261153 (Fla. 3d DCA June 17, 2020). Construing Mintz Truppman’s claim for violation of mediation confidentiality as an attempt to relitigate an attorney’s fees award from a prior federal case, the court held that the claim was barred by collateral estoppel. Curiously, the court found that this meant the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the case, making the extraordinary writ of prohibition appropriate. But the court did not explain why the doctrine of collateral estoppel – even when based on a prior federal judgment – deprived the trial court of jurisdiction over the case. And the line of cases cited in the opinion, including Carnival Corp. v. Middleton, 941 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), did not provide any rationale in reaching this same conclusion over a decade ago. On top of that, if collateral estoppel were jurisdictional, it is unclear why the court remanded for dismissal with prejudice, which would be an adjudication on the merits.  Litigants should monitor this developing area of the law.

Supreme Court Takes Second Bite at the Apple: Grants Certiorari in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer and While Sales, Inc.

By: Diego Perez Ara

Recently, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer and While Sales, Inc. This is the second time that this case makes its way to the Supreme Court.  The first time, the Court reversed the Fifth Circuit’s holding that when the argument that a claim is within the scope of an arbitration agreement is “wholly groundless” courts are allowed to decide the gateway issue of arbitrability, despite a valid clause delegating the question of arbitrability to the arbitrators.  Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., 139 S. Ct. 524, 202 L. Ed. 2d 480 (2019).  The Court, however, “express[ed] no view about whether the contract at issue in th[e] case in fact delegated the arbitrability question to an arbitrator” and remanded the case to the Fifth Circuit.  Id.

Continue Reading

COVID-19, Medical Inquiries, and Testing: What Actions Can Employers Take Without Running Afoul of the ADA?

By: Tiffany L. Anderson

As businesses reopen following the COVID-19 outbreak, employers face a conundrum—what medical information can they obtain from employees to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the workplace without running afoul of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”)?   According to guidance from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), employers can do the following:

Continue Reading

Supreme Court Finds that Nonsignatories to an International Arbitration Agreement May Compel Arbitration

By: Diego Perez Ara

On June 1, 2020, the Supreme Court unanimously held in GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC[1] that the Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, (“New York Convention”) does not preclude a nonsignatory to an international arbitration agreement from invoking state-law doctrines of equitable estoppel to compel arbitration.  The Court rejected the Eleventh Circuit’s previous finding that equitable estoppel doctrines are incompatible with the New York Convention’s signatory requirement and placed international arbitration agreements on equal footing with domestic U.S. arbitration agreements.

Continue Reading

Covid-19 Litigation: Replevin as a Recovery Device

By: Alec Schultz

Replevin, a little-known and rarely used claim under Florida law, may be a centerpiece of Covid-19 litigation seeking recovery of real property. Parties should be aware, however, that while replevin claims are a powerful tool, they are not without risks.

Continue Reading

COVID-19 Litigation to Pit Protective Orders Against the Public’s Right of Access

By: Derek E. León

While in recent years, sealed filings in the federal court system have undermined the legal tenet of the public’s right to access judicial documents and proceedings, litigation stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic stands to put a spotlight on this practice, as people demand to know who knew what and when. León Cosgrove’s Alec Schultz, in his commentary for the “Daily Business Review,” examines how practitioners and courts will need to more carefully review protective orders and sealing requests to prevent restricting the fundamental right of public access.

Continue Reading

Client Alert: How Financial Advisers Can Avoid or Deal With Litigation in the Wake of COVID-19

By: Coren H. Stern

People do not like to lose money. Behavioral economists claim that humans are wired for loss aversion. In fact, some psychological studies suggest that the pain of losing is psychologically about twice as powerful as the joy we experience when winning. Therefore, investors forget that even well-diversified portfolios tend to lose value when markets decline, and often want to point fingers at someone. This phenomenon becomes evident when one examines FINRA’s Dispute Resolution’s case filing statistics in conjunction with overall market performance. Twenty years of data clearly reveals increases in customer case filings in years following poor market performance.

Continue Reading

Coping With A Pandemic (Law360)

By: Andrew Zaron

In the attached article featured in Law360, Andrew Zaron discusses how bankruptcy law and restructuring proceedings have had to adapt to the emergency response to COVID-19, much like we’ve all had to adapt to being work from home parents and teachers.

Read The Article