SCOTUSBlog

APRIL 2, 2022

Issue : Whether a court may deny a plaintiff with an antitrust injury proximately caused by a defendant’s antitrust violation a Clayton Act cause of action based on a multifactor, prudential balancing test of “antitrust standing.”. City of Oakland, California v. Oakland Raiders. Disclosure : Goldstein & Russell, P.C.,

Government 94

Government Statute Cause of Action Entertainment 94

SCOTUSBlog

NOVEMBER 7, 2022

A state administrative law judge found one late-2016 transfer to have violated FNHRA and ordered Talevski returned to VCR; the family chose to move him to a different facility. Talevski’s wife and legal guardian brought a Section 1983 action on his behalf against VCR, HHC, and other entities, alleging violations of his FNHRA rights.

Stare Decisis 88

Stare Decisis Statute Court Contract 88

SCOTUSBlog

JANUARY 16, 2024

In an article published in 2014, law professor Thomas Merrill suggested that the Chevron decision was not regarded as a particularly consequential one when it was issued. But in the decades since then, it became one of the most significant rulings on federal administrative law, cited by federal courts more than 18,000 times.

Stare Decisis 145

Stare Decisis Court Statute Government 145

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

JULY 2, 2021

Virginia Federal Court Said Challenge to NEPA Regulations Was Not Justiciable. Wild Virginia v. The District of Utah held that the lease suspensions merely maintained the status quo and therefore were not major federal actions subject to NEPA; the conservation groups therefore lacked standing. WildEarth Guardians v.

Court 46

Court Litigating Litigation Statute 46