This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Tuesday in a case questioning whether a lawsuit seeking only symbolic damages can go forward after the government changes the unconstitutional policy being challenged, or whether the case is instead moot – that is, no longer a live controversy. Background. In an unsigned opinion, the U.S.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. As we noted last week , the Supreme Court relisted 18 new cases from its “long conference” that marked its return to business after the summer recess. A short explanation of relists is available here.
Oregon Supreme Court Said Public Trust Doctrine Did Not Impose Obligation to Protect Resources from Climate Change. With respect to the scope of the doctrine, the Supreme Court said the public trust doctrine extends both to the State navigable waters and to the State’s submerged and submersible lands. (A FEATURED CASE. Chernaik v.
That eagerness could prove the court’s undoing, however. However, James wants dissolution and crippling damages, and that could trigger a higher-court review. Supreme Court decided a case, BMW of North America v. Gore , striking down a punitive damage award. In 1996, the U.S.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. But I’ll be even more summary than usual today because of the press of business We finally may have gotten an explanation why the court rescheduled Dignity Health, Inc. In addition, the court relisted: Boardman v.
The damages in my view are excessive and absurd after the court acknowledged that no one lost a dime in these exchanges. That is precisely why the New York Court of Appeals should act to redeem the integrity of the legal system by setting aside or drastically reducing this award. Supreme Court. New York Gov.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content