Latest jury verdicts, settlements, and legal outcome analysis
A former Regional Sales Director sued her employer alleging she was fired for taking medical leave. Her employer fired back, claiming she manipulated referral records over 60 times to inflate her own pay. The jury sided with the company on every count — throwing out the discrimination claims and finding the ex-manager liable for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty.
A federal jury in New York ruled in favor of two groups of investment funds accused of coordinating stock trades to generate illegal short-swing profits in a children's entertainment company, finding the Plaintiff failed to prove the funds acted as a group under securities law.
A federal jury in the Eastern District of Texas ordered Samsung Electronics to pay $3 million to Vasu Holdings, LLC after finding that Samsung's products infringed a patent covering technology that allows mobile devices to switch seamlessly between cellular and WiFi networks without dropping an active call or data session. The jury sided with Vasu on one of three patents that went to trial, finding Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 8,886,181 both infringed and valid. It returned no-infringement verdicts on the remaining two patents.
A Pittsburgh man who was thrown from his motorcycle after a hit-and-run driver struck him from behind at a Penn Avenue intersection recovered $225,000 from a jury in Allegheny County. The jury found the Defendant negligent and determined his actions directly caused the Plaintiff's injuries, which included a wrist ligament rupture, right knee and ankle injuries, and road rash.
A federal jury in the Eastern District of Texas awarded Anonymous Media Research Holdings $78.5 million after finding that Samsung Electronics infringed patents covering automatic content recognition technology embedded in its Smart TV advertising platform, Samsung Ads. The jury found Samsung infringed all five claims put before it — across two patents covering ACR data scrubbing and media measurement methods — and rejected Samsung's argument that the patents were invalid. The award was split 52% to the '848 Patent and 48% to the '911 Patent.
Mandaris Moore, a resident of Sacramento County, purchased a certified pre-owned 2019 Dodge Grand Caravan backed by a comprehensive manufacturer warranty. Shortly after purchase, the vehicle exhibited persistent transmission, electrical, climate control, and infotainment defects that authorized service centers failed to fix. Moore filed suit against automaker FCA US, LLC under California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, alleging the vehicle was a "lemon" and seeking a full buyback or restitution. The manufacturer denied all claims, but the parties ultimately reached a conditional settlement on the eve of trial.
A San Bernardino County jury awarded Juan Cristobal Alonso more than $1.1 million after Defendants Tahir Rasool and Kohsar Logistics, LLC admitted their negligence caused him harm during a motor vehicle incident at a Chino warehouse distribution center in May 2021.
A former factory worker successfully led a class action and Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) lawsuit against Lusk Quality Machine Products, a California CNC turning and screw machining manufacturer. The complaint alleged a systematic pattern of wage theft, including forcing employees to perform off-the-clock tasks before and after shifts, deleting overtime hours through an alterable timekeeping system, inserting fictitious meal breaks, and failing to reimburse workers for uniforms and mandatory cell phone use. To resolve the labor violations before trial, the company agreed to a non-reversionary gross settlement of $365,000 to be distributed among 153 participating class members
A class of hourly drivers and non-exempt workers employed by a California logistics company secured a $455,000 settlement after their employer allegedly failed to pay proper wages, denied legally required meal and rest breaks, and refused to reimburse workers for using their personal phones and vehicles on the job. The Alameda County Superior Court granted final approval of the settlement in September 2024.
