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
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has relisted for its upcoming conference. First, as I pledged in my last post , I am only too happy to eat crow after predicting that the court would not take one-time relist Villarreal v. A short explanation of relists is available here. But the U.S.
On December 17, 2021, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts (SJC) held that an employee has a cause of action against an employer for wrongful discharge where the employer terminates the employee for.
At the Supreme Court’s conference yesterday, after which Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye announced her retirement, actions of note included: Government immunity. The court granted review in County of Santa Clara v. The court granted-and-held in In re Z.T. The court granted review in Cynosure, LLC v.
A tort action for intentional infliction of emotional distress is likely to fail. There must be not just outrageous conduct but conduct intended to cause severe emotional distress. Courts regularly exclude injuries associated with the exercise of free speech or artistic expression. Again, the court agreed.
A tort action for intentional infliction of emotional distress is likely to fail. There must be not just outrageous conduct but conduct intended to cause severe emotional distress. Courts regularly exclude injuries associated with the exercise of free speech or artistic expression. Again, the court agreed.
Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) failed to adequately analyze the climate change and environmental justice impacts of two liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals on the Brownsville Shipping Channel in Texas and two pipelines that would carry LNG to one of the terminals. 20-1045 (D.C.
On June 15, 2023, the court issued the ultimate judgment not only on the torts claims but perhaps the state of our politics. Louis, a Missouri court was faced with a claim from Carly Munoz who in 2019 sent to Six Flags’ Fright Fest with her cousin. A tort action for intentional infliction of emotional distress is likely to fail.
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.
Louisiana Federal Court Blocked Biden Administration “Pause” on New Oil and Gas Leases. The federal district court for the Western District of Louisiana issued a nationwide preliminary injunction barring the Biden administration from implementing a “Pause” on new oil and natural gas leases on public lands or in offshore waters.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) approval of an offshore drilling and production facility off the coast of Alaska in the Beaufort Sea, finding that BOEM failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). FEATURED CASE. 20-472 (U.S.
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