SCOTUSBlog

SEPTEMBER 29, 2023

On Friday, the justices agreed to decide whether the Nollan / Dolan test applies to a California man’s challenge to a development fee, or whether – as a California appeals court ruled – the fee is instead immune from such review because it was authorized by legislation. A federal appeals court ruled that Fikre’s case was not moot.

Calendaring 116

Calendaring Court Statute Court Rules 116

The Crime Report

DECEMBER 20, 2021

Adopt American Bar Association Rules for Defining Prosecutorial Misconduct. Judges should certify that the “Brady rule,” mandated under a 1963 Supreme Court ruling, is followed at each criminal trial. Some 23 states have adopted these verbatim or with some modifications. Certify Compliance.

Malfeasance 140

Malfeasance Court Attorney Law School 140

Conflict of Laws

FEBRUARY 22, 2024

Because the claims were based on Pennsylvania statutes, it argued, they were barred by the choice-of-law clause. The trial court ruled in favor of GLI. The Third Circuit ruled in favor of Raiders. Raiders opposed this motion.

Court 69

Court Contract Laws Statute 69

JURIST

JANUARY 4, 2021

The Court of Appeals of North Carolina ruled Thursday that people who are or have been in a dating relationship with a same-sex partner are equally protected against domestic violence as persons in opposite-sex relationships placed in a similar situation. While relying on the Supreme Court decision in Bostock v.

Court Rules 188

Court Rules Court Statute Court Decisions 188

JonathanTurley

OCTOBER 10, 2022

A tragedy in North Carolina could present rather difficult torts questions in a wrongful death case for a grieving family. While I am not a North Carolina lawyer, the state does not appear ideal for plaintiffs in this type of action and the facts of the case could present other difficulties.

Tort 33

Tort Personal Injury Legal Legal 33

SCOTUSBlog

OCTOBER 13, 2022

The injuries in Clendening were not the sort of combat-related or even job-related injuries one would expect: petitioner Carol Clendening seeks to recover for her late husband’s exposure to toxic drinking water while serving as a judge advocate general officer at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

Tort 105

Tort Construction Court Felony 105

SCOTUSBlog

FEBRUARY 22, 2022

He first started sketching Supreme Court arguments in the 1977-78 term, when Regents of the University of California v. I would like to prevail on him to go one more term and have some symmetry by sketching the Harvard and University of North Carolina affirmative-action cases, but it seems that his mind is made up.

Entertainment 105

Entertainment Court Statute Laws 105

Constitutional Law Reporter

NOVEMBER 28, 2022

University of North Carolina, which are poised to determine the role of affirmative action in college admissions. The primary issue in both cases is whether the Court should reverse its decision in Grutter v. Harvard College and SFFA v. Bollinger , 539 U.S. 306 (2003).

Constitutional Law 52

Constitutional Law Statute Education Court Rules 52

The Crime Report

SEPTEMBER 16, 2021

The trial penalty that coaxes both the guilty and innocent to enter pleas is exacerbated by mandatory minimum statutes, which trigger automatic penalties if invoked by the prosecutor, as well as sentencing enhancements within the discretion of the prosecutor, such as whether to file notice with the court of a prior offense.

Attorney 127

Attorney Court Lawyers Lawyer 127

Day on Torts

OCTOBER 31, 2022

In her initial expert disclosures, plaintiff identified Dr. Steege from Chapel Hill, North Carolina. The trial court ruled that “Dr. Steege did not meet the locality rule outlined in Shipley v. Code Ann. § 26-26-115(b). Williams , 350 S.W.3d 3d 527 (Tenn. 2011),” and accordingly excluded his testimony.

Tort 59

Tort Depositions Depose Court 59

SCOTUSBlog

JANUARY 25, 2022

Share For obvious reasons, the Supreme Court’s decision on Monday to grant certiorari in a pair of cases challenging race-based affirmative action in higher education drew major headlines. University of North Carolina. Less well noticed was a curious procedural feature of the second case, Students for Fair Admissions v.

Court Rules 112

Court Rules Court Statute Education 112

SCOTUSBlog

DECEMBER 31, 2020

Cohen – who first met the Lovings when he was just 29 – filed a lawsuit on their behalf, challenging the Virginia law and similar state statutes as violating the 14th Amendment. He and his co-counsel, Philip Hirschkop, took the case to the Supreme Court. Virginia , the court did find the statute unconstitutional.

Court 111

Court Lawyers Lawyer Administrative Assistant 111

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

SEPTEMBER 10, 2021

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.

Litigating 40

Litigating Litigation Court Laws 40

SCOTUSBlog

MARCH 18, 2022

Share For the third time this term, the Supreme Court will weigh in on whether someone can stage an intervention – the legal kind, that is. The North Carolina legislature passed the voter-ID law at the center of the case in December 2018. Philip Berger, the leader of the North Carolina Senate. Background.

Litigation 102

Litigation Litigating Attorney Court 102

SCOTUSBlog

DECEMBER 3, 2021

In their petition, the challengers argue that the Federal Circuit’s decision contradicts a prior Supreme Court decision that held that Section 232 is not an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to the executive branch because the statute establishes clear preconditions that the president must follow.

Healthcare 101

Healthcare Tort Education Court 101

SCOTUSBlog

OCTOBER 2, 2023

Share The Supreme Court on Monday morning declined to take an appeal by anti-abortion activists in a First Amendment dispute with Planned Parenthood, as well as a test of New Jersey’s “slogan statutes.” A jury awarded Planned Parenthood nearly $2.5 million, but the group contended that its conduct was protected by the First Amendment.

Statute 103

Statute Court Attorney Laws 103