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
In that case, the Medicaid statute obligates the state to “seek reimbursement” from the person who committed the tort, and it requires (in 42 U.S.C. Prior Supreme Courtdecisions have made clear that the state is entitled only to the portion of the settlement attributable to medical expenses.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Two pending petitions raise the question of the constitutionality of state statutes providing that corporations are deemed to have consented to “general” personal jurisdiction by virtue of having registered to do business in a state. Some older Supreme Courtdecisions support that theory of consent. Returning Relists.
Some states, such as Louisiana and North Carolina, enacted mandatory death penalty statutes, eliminating discretion entirely from the death penalty system. Others – Georgia, Florida and Texas – chose a different path, retaining the punishment but guiding discretion by narrowing and specifying the class of death-eligible crimes.
There are state courts and federal courts, state statutes and federal statutes, state common law and federal common law. This feeling of pity is compounded when I imagine this same lawyer trying to advise her client as to whether a choice-of-court clause will be enforced by a court in the United States.
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. We’ll know more soon.
The statute in its plain language states, criminal penalties will apply to “every person who performs or attempts to perform an abortion.” 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.
Half of all incarcerated people serving LWOP are located in one of five states included in the review: California, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. Florida has the highest count of incarcerated people serving life without parole sentences. Report authors highlighted a recent Supreme Courtdecision in Canada.
And the court denied review to a group of 13 much-relisted cases that raised the question whether felony defendants have a constitutional right to a 12-person jury rather than just a six-person one. Justice Neil Gorsuch filed an opinion dissenting from the denial of cert , arguing that the court’s 1970 decision in Williams v.
Coverage of federal fraud statutes Porat v. Florida and Moore v. Texas mandate that courts deem the standard of “significantly subaverage intellectual functioning” for determining intellectual disability in Atkins v. There are six newly relisted cases this week, so I’m going to be more summary than usual in describing them.
Moving on to potential blockbusters that don’t explicitly call on the court to overrule precedent. Environmental Protection Agency , 21-454 , is a long-running Clean Water Act dispute that has already been the subject of one major Supreme Courtdecision. Florida , 21-53. They invoke Rapanos v. relisted after the Oct.
Thus, starting in 1988 (when, as part of broader reforms to the court’s docket, Congress eliminated the ability to directly appeal to the Supreme Court district courtdecisions striking down state or federal statutes), the practice became all but moribund.
Avenatti came to the Supreme Court earlier this year, asking the justices to decide whether one of the statutes under which he was convicted – barring fraud that deprives someone else of “the intangible right of honest services” – is so vague that it is unconstitutional. A Florida state court upheld Cunningham’s conviction.
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. It argues that the 3rd Circuit’s decision has thrown all of that into upheaval and must be reviewed. 17 conference) Returning Relists City of Ocala, Florida v.
The federal district court for the District of South Dakota temporarily enjoined enforcement of provisions of a riot boosting statute enacted in South Dakota in 2019 in response to anticipated protests of the Keystone XL pipeline. Minnesota Supreme Court Declined to Review Claims Regarding Environmental Review for Oil Pipeline.
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.
Both cases are now before the Supreme Court. Because of the wrinkles of the court’s jurisdictional statutes, Garcia comes from the three-judge district court directly to the Supreme Court as an appeal over which the court has mandatory jurisdiction. Florida and Moore v. rescheduled before the Dec.
On the other hand, 16 states protect access to abortion through various methods, such as state constitutional amendments and laws that protect the right to privacy, state supreme courtdecisions interpreting equal protection to include reproductive care, and statutes that protect access to reproductive care.
DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district courtdecision that vacated the listing of the Arctic ringed seal as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Martin County, Florida v. order setting schedule Mar. 1, 2018; order denying remand and notice re tutorial Feb.
Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that its review of the remand order in Baltimore’s climate change case against fossil fuel companies was limited to determining whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute.
Second, he was to continue an investigation that had turned up multiple classified documents in various unsecured locations throughout Trump’s primary Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago. In the summer of 2023, Smith unveiled indictments in both investigations. After careful study of this seminal issue, the answer is no.
In Minnesota, the district court granted the State of Minnesota’s motion to remand its case, which asserts state law claims under common law and consumer protection statutes. s consumer protection statute. On March 26, 2021, the court denied Exxon’s emergency motion for a temporary stay of the remand order. Georgia , No.
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