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
Prior Supreme Courtdecisions have made clear that the state is entitled only to the portion of the settlement attributable to medical expenses. The question now is how much of the total settlement Florida can recover. This case will determine how those provisions apply specifically to future medical expenses.
The court found that the appeal’s courtdecision in this case, which vacated Smith’s original conviction in the improper venue, “did not adjudicate Smith’s culpability, and thus [did] not trigger the Double Jeopardy Clause.” Federal prosecutors originally indicted Timothy Smith for hacking a Florida company.
The court looked at other issues in its comprehensive decision, including an argument that the copyright holder waited too long to sue (rejected, as the suit was brought within the 3-year statute of limitations) and arguments that any harm was “de minimis” and did not justify a lawsuit.
A Florida-based protein powder maker is asking the Seventh Circuit to reconsider its upholding of a Wisconsin federal court'sdecision to toss its claims over allegedly defective plastic zipper pouches on the grounds that they were filed too late.
Courts in other states had rejected that argument (see our articles on decisions in New York , Florida and Georgia ), but the question of the status of the law remained unresolved in California.
.” They also argued that PASS lacked standing because it failed to prove: that its members suffered an injury-in-fact; that the alleged injury was fairly traceable to an action by Walz and Minnesota; and that the injury was redressable by a favorable courtdecision.
This week, we highlight cert petitions that ask the court to consider, among other things, whether a prison official is entitled to qualified immunity after he forced an elderly diabetic man into a shower filled with feces and then prevented him from cleaning his open wounds for a week. A federal district court in Florida ruled for Hoxie.
While some view the American Bar Association’s elimination of continuing legal education diversity requirements as capitulating to a Florida Supreme Courtdecision against the mandate, it was a strategic decision to serve Florida members while improving diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in other ways, says Tiffani Lee at Holland & Knight.
In a decision this week, the Florida Supreme Court rejected claims by Flo & Eddie (of the 1960s band the Turtles) that there was a common law public performance right in pre-1972 sound recordings in the state of Florida (the opinion is available here ). Could California decide differently?
Supreme Court'sdecision in Facebook v. Duguid closes one door to potential Telephone Consumer Protection Act lawsuits, Florida's newly amended state law — featuring a broader autodialer definition — has opened another, say attorneys at Buchanan Ingersoll. Although the U.S.
Obviously, that settlement does not appear to resolve the issues with independent sound recording owners (like Flo & Eddie who brought the actions that have resulted in NY and California decisions finding a performance right in pre-1972 recordings in those two states). First, a review of the issue with pre-1972 sound recordings.
The "Stop WOKE Act" (HB7) (the "Act") is set to go into effect on July 1, 2022, following a courtdecision this week declining to enter an injunction to halt the Act.
Oklahoma is the latest to join states like Florida in placing restrictions on telephonic sales calls in the wake of the United States Supreme Court'sdecision in.
s Eleventh Circuit challenge to a Florida district courtdecision certifying several classes of drivers alleging the automaker deceptively marketed its Shelby Mustang GT350 as racetrack-ready, saying the decision gives class litigants further ammunition to pursue "blackmail settlements" from corporate defendants.
This week, we highlight petitions that ask the court to consider, among other things, whether that 30-day deadline bars owners from reclaiming property if they file with a missing signature. Luis Sanchez is a part-owner of a small business in Florida selling electronics to Latin American customers.
The key issue before the Court is whether the Texas and Florida laws violate the First Amendment. Facts of the Cases The two cases before the Court, Moody v. Paxton , involve laws enacted by Florida and Texas to regulate major social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and X (formerly known as Twitter).
But the court explained that it was “not convinced, however, that Laufer abandoned her case in an effort to evade our review,” and it added that it might “exercise our discretion differently in a future case.” This article was originally published at Howe on the Court.
Gambling on tribal lands first came to prominence with a Seminole casino in Florida in the late 1970s. The Supreme Court first addressed the problem squarely in its 1987 decision in California v. Some background about the general compromise that governs that problem sets the stage for this dispute.
Indeed, in one opinion, the court capitalized “Black” in relating the facts stated in a U.S. Supreme Courtdecision, even though that Court had used lower case “black” to describe the defendant. ( People v. 4th 968, 982, citing Florida v. Brown (2015) 61 Cal.4th 2000) 529 U.S.
Pre-1972 sound recordings are also still an issue, with state appeals courts looking at US District Courtdecisions in New York and Florida, trying to decide if a performance right exists in these recordings in these two states (we wrote about the NY appeal here , and the initial Floridadecision here ).
Supreme Court unanimously held that the Constitution permits the retrial of a defendant following a trial in an improper venue conducted before a jury drawn from the wrong district. Facts of the Case Timothy Smith was indicted in the Northern District of Florida for theft of trade secrets from a website owned by StrikeLines.
Supreme Court unanimously held that the Constitution permits the retrial of a defendant following a trial in an improper venue conducted before a jury drawn from the wrong district. Facts of the Case Timothy Smith was indicted in the Northern District of Florida for theft of trade secrets from a website owned by StrikeLines.
In a Courtdecision in 2008, the US Court of Appeals determined that the FCC had not adequately assessed its obligations under NEPA with respect to the impact of communications towers on birds after there were claims that towers killed millions of birds each year. After the Courtdecision, American Bird Conservancy v.
The American Civil Liberties Union has challenged the constitutionality of the Florida law, making some of the same arguments that caused several state supreme courts to strike down broad bans on land ownership by foreign citizens of Asian countries decades ago, including a pivotal California Supreme Courtdecision in 1952.”
In most states, those suits have been dismissed with courts finding that state law did not provide for a performance right in these pre-1972 recordings (see our articles about decisions in New York , Florida and Georgia reaching that conclusion). The issue in California, however, is still open.
The state courts in Florida and Connecticut have become more likely to enforce in recent years. This means that the federal courts are free to adopt their own view of whether a clause is unreasonable or contrary to public policy without considering prior state courtdecisions. They apply federal common law.
The US Court of Appeals this week determined that the FCC’s requirement that broadcasters confirm by searching DOJ and FCC databases that all buyers of program time on their stations are not representatives of foreign governments was beyond the power of the FCC as authorized by Congress.
FCC , which rejected the requirement that broadcast licensees independently check two federal databases to verify whether an airtime lessee is a “foreign governmental entity” (see our Broadcast Law Blog article on the Court’sdecision here ).
This week’s federal Court of Appeals order was very direct, relying on the state courtdecision that there was no public performance right to end the case. While this ends the case in NY, appellate courts in California and Florida still need to rule on the issue of whether there is a performance royalty in those states.
The Florida case has been referred to that state’s highest court for an advisory ruling on the state of the state’s law on the issue, and earlier this week, the same thing happened in California.
Florida and Moore v. Texas mandate that courts deem the standard of “significantly subaverage intellectual functioning” for determining intellectual disability in Atkins v. rescheduled before the Dec. 1 conference; relisted after the Dec. 12 and Jan. 19 conferences) Hamm v. Smith , 23-167 Issues : (1) Whether Hall v.
Despite a series of courtdecisions rejecting any First Amendment claim of pirates, and denying any claim that these low-power, local stations did not implicate the FCC's power over interstate commerce regulation, pirates have never gone away. (see
The decision ( available here in a version subject to revision) was reached after the US Court of Appeals certified the question to the state court as being necessary to resolve the appeal of a US District Courtdecision which had found such a right to exist in a lawsuit brought by Flo & Eddie of the band the Turtles against Sirius XM Radio.
One of those four involves an issue on which the court already is considering 11 other relisted cases: whether the Sixth and 14th Amendments require the use of a 12-person jury to try defendants accused of felonies, rather than the six-person jury Florida affords for many such offenses. Florida and Moore v. 12 and Apr.
Share The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments next week in a dispute over whether a Florida woman who retired from her job as a firefighter can bring a lawsuit against her former employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act alleging discrimination in how benefits are provided in the years after she left her job.
The “independent state legislature” theory first made an appearance at the Supreme Court in a concurring opinion by then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist in Bush v. Gore , the case that halted the recount in Florida in the 2000 presidential election. Roberts agreed that the court did have the power to decide the case on the merits.
In 2017, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit struck down a Florida law preventing medical professionals from asking patients about firearm ownership. The court stated , “the First Amendment ensures that doctors cannot be threatened with state punishment for speech even if it goes beyond diagnosis and treatment.”
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district courtdecision that vacated the listing of the Beringia distinct population segment (DPS) of the Pacific bearded seal subspecies as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Circuit Court of Appeals to expedite consideration of their petition for review.
Share Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles, commentary, and other noteworthy links related to the Supreme Court. What to know (Morgan Fischer, The Arizona Republic) City Government Unions Are Shrinking After Supreme CourtDecision (Claudia Irizarry Aponte & Suhail Bhat, The City) Gay marriage is legal in Texas.
The book combines art and academic analysis into a refreshing and creative take on major Supreme Court cases — with an added dash of “Florida weirdness” to keep things interesting. Artist and lawyer Xavier Cortada has created 10 striking paintings, each depicting a significant Supreme Court case originating in Florida.
A handful of states — Alabama, Florida, Idaho, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and South Carolina, according to the advocacy group MAP — make it a felony to provide gender-affirming care to youths.
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