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 This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, whether the statute of limitations in the Quiet Title Act is a jurisdictional rule or a claims-processing rule and whether the government can prosecute wire fraud under a “right to control” theory of property. In Wilkins v. In the U.S.
Supreme Court yesterday upheld the constitutionality of Pennsylvania’s corporate registration statute, even though it requires out-of-state corporations registering to do business within the state to consent to all-purpose (general) personal jurisdiction. This post is by Maggie Gardner, a professor of law at Cornell Law School.
Hau: Interim relief against contracting authorities: classification as a civil and commercial matter, coordination of parallel proceedings and procedural autonomy of the Member States. an assignee as a third party is bound by a jurisdiction clause agreed by the original contracting parties. Bandemer (2021).
The court said the statutory language authorized courts to grant stays and that EPA’s reading of the statute “would have the perverse result of empowering this court to act when the agency denies a stay but not when it chooses to grant one.” Environmental Groups Filed NEPA Challenge of Montana Coal Mine Expansion.
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.
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. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore , No.
This week, we highlight petitions asking the court to consider, among other things, whether to overturn a ruling by the Montana Supreme Court that struck down a state law requiring minors under the age of 18 to get consent from their parents before obtaining an abortion. Last August, the Montana Supreme Court upheld that ruling.
The Oklahoma charter school board that approved the Catholic schools application tells the justices that a state supreme court ruling invalidating its contract with the school violates the Constitution and harms lower-income families. Isidore is a private actor working under a contract with the state.
Montana Federal Court Allowed Some Coal Mining Activity to Take Place While Federal Agency Completed Required NEPA Review. The company said the injunction would “[i]n a matter of weeks … cause severe consequences to the mine and its employees, in an area of Montana that can ill-afford economic displacement.” CP18-5 (FERC Oct.
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. Northern Plains Resource Council v. 20-35412 (9th Cir.
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. Bernhardt , No. 4:18-cv-05712 (N.D. Washington , No. 22O152 (U.S.
Montana Federal Court Found Failure to Take a Hard Look at Costs of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Review of Coal Mine Expansion. The federal district court for the District of Montana found flaws in an updated environmental assessment for a mining plan modification that extended the life of the Spring Creek Mine, a surface coal mine in Montana.
On February 28, Montana and Wyoming filed a motion seeking to lift the stay and also seeking immediate suspension of the Waste Prevention Rule’s implementation deadlines. 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