Remove 2020 Remove Cause of Action Remove Court Rules Remove Statute
article thumbnail

December 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The court also declined to vacate BLM’s leasing decisions and instead enjoined BLM from issuing drilling permits for the leases while it responds to the court’s decision. Trade Groups Proceeding with Narrower Challenge to 2016 Refrigerant Management Rule; NRDC and States Challenge 2020 Rescission of Portion of Rule.

Court 54
article thumbnail

Public Duty Doctrine Applied To Eliminate Claim

Day on Torts

16, 2020), plaintiff filed suit under the Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA) after he was injured in a car accident. Based on these findings, the Court ruled that plaintiff had not met the requirements of the first exception to the Public Duty Doctrine. In Kimble v. Dyer County Tennessee , No. W2019-02042-COA-R3-CV (Tenn.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

New rules on service outside Australia for the Federal Court of Australia

Conflict of Laws

The Federal Court Legislation Amendment Rules 2022 (Cth) (‘Amendment Rules’) came into force on 13 January 2023. Among other things, they amend the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (‘FCR’) by repealing division 10.4, The Amendment Rules replace the old division 10.4 1] Civil Procedure Rules 2006 (ACT) div 6.8.9;

Court 40
article thumbnail

Leave to Issue and Serve Originating Process Outside Jurisdiction Versus Substituted Service: A Distinction with a Difference

Conflict of Laws

Secondly, a court can validly exercise jurisdiction over a defendant in an action in personam where such defendant submits to the court’s jurisdiction or waives his right to raise a jurisdictional challenge. Thus, a court may only stretch its jurisdictional arm outside its territory in certain limited circumstances. [12]

Court 76
article thumbnail

Spooky Torts: The 2023 List of Litigation Horrors

JonathanTurley

The court ruled against her and found that the park’s duty was only to “make conditions as safe as they appear to be” and that Munoz “ was aware of the risk she encountered, and expected to be surprised, startled, and scared.” See Pennsylvania General Assembly Statute §7102. Trimble ␣ 315 Mo.

Tort 44
article thumbnail

September 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The New Jersey court also found no basis for Grable jurisdiction, rejecting the companies’ arguments that the City’s claims necessarily raised substantial and actually disputed issues of federal law such as First Amendment issues or issues addressed by federal environmental statutes. CDV-2020-307 (Mont. State , No.