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 US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from North Carolina on Monday over the constitutionality of a state law allowing employers to sue employees working as undercover investigators. The challenged statute, N.C. The court stated that the law substantially “burden[ed] newsgathering and publishing activities.”
The US Supreme Court Thursday ruled Thursday that damages for emotional distress are not recoverable in a private lawsuit to enforce either the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Affordable Care Act. This decision clarifies what damages are available to individuals who sue under federal anti-discrimination statutes.
Natural Resources Defense Council , the Supreme Court ruled that courts should defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute as long as that interpretation is reasonable. On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed to reconsider its ruling in Chevron. Share Nearly 40 years ago, in Chevron v.
Further, where the fraud was related to the purchase of plaintiff’s home, and the jury awarded plaintiff the amount she paid for the home in compensatorydamages, that award was affirmed. On appeal, the verdict for compensatorydamages was affirmed, but the punitive award was vacated and remanded for further proceedings.
The class action complaint filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York alleged that in 2019 Musk and his corporations, SpaceX and Tesla, purchased, developed, promoted, and operated Dogecoin. Elon Musk, SpaceX, and Tesla Thursday were sued for $258 billion by Dogecoin investor Keith Johnson.
Supreme Court held that a deaf student seeking compensatorydamages under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for the denial of a free and appropriate education may proceed without exhausting the administrative processes of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) because the remedy sought is not one IDEA provides.
Statute Citations: For official citations, follow the convention mandated by the specific citation guide you are using (e.g., Often, numerals are used for section numbers, statutes, and other numerical identifiers. 2113 (a) for the statute on bank robbery. Example: The court awarded damages in the total amount of $1,300.75.
Where the gravamen of plaintiff’s complaint was his tort claim for defamation seeking unliquidated damages, the chancery court did not have subject matter jurisdiction and the case should have been transferred to circuit court. The trial court denied the motion and ultimately found for plaintiff. In Lowery v. Code Ann. §
Cohen , the Supreme Court holds that, although the pertinent statute’s language “does not point unerringly to th[e] result” the court reaches, a plaintiff seeking an accounting must “state a specific dollar amount to support a default judgment granting monetary relief.”
The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Tuesday in the case of a Georgia student who was stopped from handing out religious literature and speaking about his faith on the campus of his public college. The question before the court on Tuesday in Uzuegbunam v. After the U.S.
Plaintiff’s initial complaint was filed in May 2009 and sought $1 million in compensatorydamages and $1 million in punitive damages. Defendant was never served with this amended complaint, but the trial court entered a final judgment awarding plaintiff $3 million in total damages in August 2017. In Turner v.
In its decision, the Court took the uncommon step of sua sponte certifying a question of state law (here, Ohio law) to a state supreme supreme court (the Ohio Supreme Court). Who better to know the answer to that question than the Ohio Supreme Court, which, under Erie Railroad Co. Tompkins , 304 U.S. Lehman Bros.
Despite this history, a new decision out of the High Court is still shocking in its implications for further attacks on free speech. The court ruled that newspapers and television stations that post articles on social media sites like Facebook are liable for other third party comments on those posts. 47 U.S.C. § 230(e)(3).
It evidently has not stopped claimants from seeking enforcement of punitive damage awards in other civil law legal systems. According to him, data on punitive damages is well documented, delivering the required statistical data on frequency and severity of loss, which allows the inference of an average loss and therefore an adequate premium.
which the Supreme Court will hear on Tuesday, is about the types of remedies that plaintiffs may recover when they prove violations of certain federal anti-discrimination laws — in particular, whether such plaintiffs may recover damages for emotional distress. The district court dismissed Cummings’ case, and the U.S.
Share This week we highlight petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, whether an award of punitive damages that doubles the compensatorydamages can comport with due process and how a defendant can prove ineffective assistance of counsel in rejecting a plea offer. On appeal, the U.S.
Montana Department of Revenue , the Supreme Court ruled that although states are not required to subsidize private education, states that choose to do so cannot exclude religious schools from receiving funding simply because they are religious. A new case on public funding and religious education. Last year, in Espinoza v. In Carson v.
Actions of note at yesterday’s Supreme Court conference included: Supreme Court OK’s commutation of three-strikes sentence. The court granted review in Pulliam v. The appellate court concluded the Rule doesn’t limit attorney fees, disagreeing with Lafferty v. The court denied depublication.]. Jenkins (Jan.
Supreme Court heard oral arguments in one of the term’s most closely-watched cases. However, in defending its controversial abortion law, the State of Mississippi has asked the Court to overturn its prior decisions in Roe v. Several of the Court’s Conservative justices appeared willing to overrule both Roe and Casey.
Supreme Court heard oral arguments in one of the term’s most closely-watched cases. However, in defending its controversial abortion law, the State of Mississippi has asked the Court to overturn its prior decisions in Roe v. Several of the Court’s Conservative justices appeared willing to overrule both Roe and Casey.
This incident could well prove a violation of a statute or regulation making the act “negligent per se.” 2d 774 (1998), bystanders can recover for emotional distress damages only when the injury is caused by a sudden, traumatic event and the plaintiff was aware that the event was causing injury to the victim. Legg, 441 P.2d
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. Because the court was running a little behind this year and just released its last opinions on Thursday, the court also held the mop-up conference on Thursday, and the order list will be released Friday morning at 9:30 a.m.
Federal Court in Rhode Island Allowed Failure-to-Adapt Claims to Proceed. The federal district court for the District of Rhode Island for the most part denied a motion to dismiss a citizen suit asserting that Shell Oil Products US and other defendants (Shell) failed to prepare a terminal in Providence for the impacts of climate change.
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.
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the U.S. The court therefore vacated and remanded the ACE Rule—which repealed the 2015 Clean Power Plan rule and in its place adopted a replacement rule that relied only on heat-rate improvements at individual plants. On January 19, 2021, the D.C. Third, the D.C. American Lung Association v.
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.
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