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
Carole Johnson (consolidated cases), the Court found that the conditions set by Novartis and United Therapeutics on covered entities did not violate the 340B statute, although more restrictive conditions could violate the law. A number of drug companies sued to enjoin enforcement. Novartis and United Therapeutics Corporation sued in the D.C.
This statute permits a defendant’s attorney to enter into plea negotiations with the U.S. Attorney’s Office to determine if a mutually agreed upon guilty plea contract can be reached. The appeals court pointed out that the “guardrails” of this statute “are designed to keep the district court within the bounds of the sentencing statute.”
Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit’s “right to control” theory of fraud — which treats the deprivation of complete and accurate information bearing on a person’s economic decision as a species of property fraud — states a valid basis for liability under the federal wire fraud statute.”. United States v. Please check back for updates.
The Department of Health and Human Services issued the rule, which applies to more than 10 million workers, in November, but two federal district courts – in Missouri and Louisiana – put the rule on hold in roughly half the states. Such a mandate, the court wrote, “fits neatly within” the power given to HHS by Congress.
But the court declined to invalidate the entire agency for this structural flaw, instead severing the for-cause provision from the rest of its authorizing statute. LLC involves how to determine the law to be applied under federal admiralty law in a maritime contract case. Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co.,
Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) authorization of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from three facilities in Louisiana, Maryland, and Texas. The court also granted motions to strike the state law claims pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute. In an unpublished decision, the D.C.
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. Louisiana v. Haaland , No. 20-cv-56 (D.D.C.).
Therefore, she reasons, the mandate is necessary to protect those employees from the possibility of contracting COVID-19 while they are at work – saving over 6,500 lives and preventing over a quarter-million employees from being hospitalized over a six-month period. Several challenges to the rule followed.
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed , holding that because a federal agency now has the final say over how the private horse-racing authority implements the federal statute, the amended law did not impermissibly delegate authority to a private entity. In a one-paragraph order, the justices granted the authoritys request. Franklin v.
These cases reflect the judiciarys ongoing role in interpreting federal statutes, balancing individual rights against governmental power, and resolving contentious social and political questions. The key issues centered on whether Arizonas voter registration laws conflicted with federal statutes and constitutional protections.
Louisiana Federal Court Halted Work on Crude Oil Pipeline in Swamp Area. The federal district court for the Middle District of Louisiana enjoined work on the Bayou Bridge Pipeline in the Atchafalaya Basin in Louisiana. Jacobson’s lawsuit asserted defamation, breach of contract, and promissory estoppel claims.
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