Remove Cause of Action Remove Rhode Island Remove Statute
article thumbnail

Liability for undelivered mail and the chilling effect of subpoenas

SCOTUSBlog

It reasoned that loss and miscarriage cover intentional acts, as the statute only qualifies transmission with negligent. Konan argues that the 5th Circuit is the lone court on the wrong side of a split in holding that the statute that prohibits conspiracy to violate civil rights, 42 U.S.C. But the U.S. Relisted after the Dec.

Tort 102
article thumbnail

Court asks for government’s views in decades-old Exxon dispute with Cuba

SCOTUSBlog

Writing for the majority, Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan explained that the terms of the FSIA contemplate that jurisdiction in a civil action against a foreign sovereign could arise only under the FSIA itself, not under some other statute like Title III. Senior Judge A. Raymond Randolph dissented.

Court 126
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

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. Rhode Island v. West Virginia v.

article thumbnail

November 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The First Circuit—like the Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits in other climate change cases—concluded that the scope of its appellate review was limited to whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. State court proceedings in Rhode Island’s case were put on hold in August pending the U.S.

article thumbnail

January 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

1442, or the civil-rights removal statute, 28 U.S.C. The district court rejected eight grounds for removal, but the Fourth Circuit concluded its appellate jurisdiction was limited to determining whether the companies properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. Rhode Island , No. Chevron Corp.

Court 52
article thumbnail

July 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The Court held that the provision used “extension” in its “temporal sense,” but that the statute did not impose a “continuity requirement” and instead allowed small refineries to apply for hardship extensions “at any time.” Living Rivers v. Hoffman , No. 4:19-cv-00057 (D. Utah June 21, 2021). In re Enbridge Energy, LP , Nos.

Court 49