United States: Court Procedure

On October 13, 2026, in Bolton v. Inland Fresh Seafood Corporation of America, Inc., No. 24-10084, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit overturned its longstanding practice of requiring benefit plan participants to exhaust administrative remedies before filing statutory claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Administrative exhaustion requirements compel potential litigants to satisfy any plan-required internal appeals process with the plan sponsor or the plan administrator to resolve a dispute before a suit may be filed in court.

The court will look at each parent’s income to determine issues such as child support or post-secondary support. Imputed income is an estimate by the court of an individual’s income, even if they are not actually earning that amount.

Recent U.S. court decisions have produced significant consequences for Japanese companies doing business with the United States, spanning tariff refund mechanisms, jurisdictional challenges, and substantial patent verdicts. This advisory examines six critical developments that could reshape legal strategies for Japanese exporters and technology companies operating in the American market.

When a concrete equipment manufacturer terminated its Oklahoma dealer and invoked a forum-selection clause requiring litigation in Iowa, the dealer sued locally under state dealer-protection laws. The federal court's ruling on whether the forum clause could override Oklahoma's Fair Practices Act turned on subtle statutory language that distinguished it from similar laws in other states.

A New York appellate court has issued a significant ruling on corporate veil-piercing, holding that company owners can face personal liability for judgment debts when they engage in asset-stripping transactions designed to frustrate creditors—even if the underlying debt arose from a legitimate arm's-length transaction.

As generative AI becomes increasingly integrated into litigation workflows, courts are grappling with how these tools should be used with confidential discovery materials. A recent Colorado district court decision examines the balance between enabling AI-assisted legal work and protecting sensitive information, distinguishing between consumer-grade platforms and enterprise tools with robust safeguards.

A New York court has temporarily halted the implementation of New York City's pied-à-terre tax, ruling that the city's notices to homeowners were arbitrary and violated due process rights. The judge ordered the city to restart the entire rollout process while separate lawsuits challenge the tax's legality itself. Despite the stay, property owners who received notices are advised to continue filing for exemptions pending further court guidance.

This monthly newsletter examines significant legal trends and landmark cases in product liability and mass torts, including recent court decisions on phenylephrine preemption, BIOCELL implant litigation, AI-directed court filings, EPA hazardous substance designations, and climate superfund laws. The analysis provides strategic insights for businesses navigating complex tort litigation and regulatory challenges across multiple industries.

The Federal Circuit recently reviewed a patent infringement case involving communication systems that use non-uniform satellite constellations to transmit digital information. While the lower court had granted summary judgment on patent eligibility and found infringement, the appellate court reached a split decision on the validity of the patents. The case highlights the ongoing challenges in determining patent eligibility under the Alice framework, particularly for claims involving mathematical concepts ve