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
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals upheld its previous decision on Tuesday which found Pennsylvania statutes preventing “18-to-20-year-olds from carrying firearms outside their homes during a state of emergency” unconstitutional. ” The court then explained that in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn, Inc.
The US Supreme Court rejected Friday an RNC application to stay a recent Pennsylvania Supreme Courtdecision that grants voters who cast defective mail-in ballots an option to alternatively cast in-person provisional ballots. The voters brought suit, claiming they were wrongfully disenfranchised from the voting process.
This represents a significant change from the 2019 Raise the Age law , which allowed most 16- and 17-year-olds to remain under juvenile court jurisdiction regardless of the severity of the charges. For youth ages 13 to 15, serious felony cases may also be moved from adult criminal court back to the juvenile system.
Osseo Area Schools is the latest in a long series of Supreme Court cases involving the statutory rights Congress has granted to schoolchildren with disabilities. The discrimination statutes bar any discrimination by a public entity (such as a school district) by reason of [any] disability. So what have the lower courts done?
The Supreme Court of Illinois Thursday ruled that individuals have a five-year period to launch a claim under the Biometric Information Privacy Act. This ruling reverses an appellate courtdecision that allowed for only a one-year period on claims relating to unlawful handling of people’s data under the act.
The US Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge Monday to the appellate courtdecision that struck down Minnesota law prohibiting adults aged 18-20 from obtaining a permit to own guns and carry them in public. ” said Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan M.
The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday over a challenge to Louisiana’s recently redrawn voting map and its two Black-majority districts. But this has became life as usual for the states under this Court’s voting cases.” It is unclear how the court will rule in the case.
The US Supreme Court ruled Thursday in Dubin v. United States that in order to constitute aggravated identity theft, the use of a person’s identity must be at the “crux” of what makes the conduct criminal, reversing a lower courtdecision.
The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Monday denied the federal government’s motion to stay a district courtdecision striking down the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) eviction moratorium. In response to COVID-19, the CDC ordered a nationwide moratorium on residential evictions last fall.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in two cases involving one of its own precedents regarding felony firearms possession. Gregory Greer was convicted in the first case under §922(g) and sentenced to prison, but after the Rehaif decision, he appealed that conviction. Decisions in both cases should come this summer.
Dewberry Engineers is whether a federal court calculating the defendants profits in a trademark infringement lawsuit can include all the profits of related entities in the same corporate group. The problem, though, Kagan explained, is that this is not a tenable take on the decisions below, which never considered that portion of the statute.
Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear the case of a former Chicago alderman, who served four months in a federal prison for lying to federal financial regulators about loans he took out from a local bank and failed to pay. He was also charged with filing false income tax returns, but those charges are not before the Supreme Court.)
Share At oral arguments earlier this week the Supreme Court was skeptical of the Food and Drug Administrations effort to block a North Carolina-based company from challenging the denial of its application to market e-cigarettes in the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, based in Louisiana.
Supreme Court held that in awarding the defendants profits to the prevailing plaintiff in a trademark infringement suit under the Lanham Act, a court can award only profits ascribable to the defendant itself. A divided Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. Supreme CourtsDecision The Supreme Court disagreed.
One example is a recent US District Court ruling on a motion for summary judgment of a copyright lawsuit brought by a photographer when his photos of Willie Nelson and Carlos Santana appeared on a news website to illustrate articles on the musicians. However, relying on the creative commons license can be perilous.
McGills brief argued that a jurisdictional problem (based on the courtsdecision in Badgerow v. It took Roberts 10 separate questions to elicit that admission! The most important thing I got out of the argument is that the justices seem highly motivated to decide the question presented.
Supreme Court held that a case voluntarily dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) counts as a final proceeding under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The Courtsdecision was unanimous. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) permits a court, [o]n motion and just terms, to relieve a party.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. Laws governing elections and the right to participate in the political process receive varying degrees of scrutiny when challenged in court. A federal district court dismissed their lawsuit. CoreCivic, Inc.
Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. Facts of the Case As the Court explained in its opinion, Federal and state law distinguish between two kinds of payments to public officials—bribes and gratuities. As enacted in 1984, the statute at issue in the case, 18 U.S.C. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Snyder’s conviction.
Supreme Court held that a claim under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) does not accrue for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 2401(a) ’s default six-year statute of limitations until the plaintiff is injured by final agency action. The District Court dismissed the suit as time-barred under 28 U. In Corner Post, Inc.
Supreme Court heard oral arguments on April 21, 2021 in the pending assignor estoppel case of Minerva Surgical Inc. The basic idea is that an inventor who signs the oath-of-inventorship and assign rights to a third party is estopped from later challenging the patent’s validity in court. by Dennis Crouch. Hologic Inc.
Share The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Tuesday in two related immigration cases , Johnson v. Gonzalez raises the additional question of whether, in a class action brought by noncitizens in detention, a district court has the authority to issue classwide injunctive relief. The Supreme Court will now review those decisions.
Supreme Court narrowed the scope of a federal aggravated identity theft statute. The issue before the Court was whether, in defrauding Medicaid, he also committed “[a]ggravated identity theft” under 18 U.S.C. Supreme Court’sDecision The Supreme Court sided with Durbin. In Durbin v. 1028A(a)(1).
The statute, though, contains several exceptions to the discharge, generally describing debts that Congress regarded as so important or reflecting such objectionable behavior that it is inappropriate for the debtor to discharge them. For Barrett, the case begins and ends with the language of the statute.
Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the appeal of CACI International Inc., CACI was appealing a lower courtdecision that favored the Iraqi men in 2019. law named the Alien Tort Statute that allows non-U.S. The Supreme Court in 2013 narrowed the Alien Tort Statute to cover conduct that occurred in the U.S.
Hotels.com crisply resolved what would seem to be a basic procedural question: how courts should decide the “costs” that the prevailing party on appeal can recover from the losing party. Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion for a unanimous court tells us the answer: the court that resolved the appeal decides, not the district court.
In 2019, we blogged that the District Court found for the plaintiffs, holding that CMS did not have the statutory authority to make such a change without first conducting a hospital acquisition cost survey data. The District Court opinion was subsequently reversed by the D.C. The statute sets this “average price” as ASP plus 6%.
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in California that had rejected a party’s efforts to force a putative class action out of court and into arbitration. Coinbase thinks that its user agreement forces the customers into arbitration, but the district court disagreed. Provident Consumer Discount Co. ,
Share The court will hear its second bankruptcy case of the week next Tuesday, with Bartenwerfer v. Dissatisfied with the purchase, Buckley eventually obtained a judgment in a California state court based on the failure of the Bartenwerfers to disclose information about the house on the standard-form Transfer Disclosure Statement.
Tribal courts are often the only immediately available forum to address violent crime in Indian Country, but the sentences they can impose are extremely limited and often insufficient. Denezpi was sentenced to 140 days by the Court of Indian Offenses pursuant to that plea, time he had already served in custody. .
Finding a likelihood that consumers would confuse the “Bad Spaniels” toy with Jack Daniel’s, the trial court ruled in favor of Jack Daniel’s and barred VIP from continuing to manufacture the Bad Spaniels toy. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reversed on both counts. Jack Daniel’s offers a similar argument on the dilution statute.
Supreme Court'sdecision in Corner Post v. Federal Reserve Board effectively gives new entities their own personal statute of limitations to challenge rules and regulations, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh's concurrence may portend the court's view that those entities do not need to be directly regulated, say attorneys at Snell & Wilmer.
Share Federal felon-in-possession defendants who fail in the trial court to assert their rights under the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Rehaif v. United States face an “uphill climb” to get a new trial or plea proceeding, the court stated Monday in Greer v. United States and United States v.
was an odd one: The justices asked no questions at all about the question on which theyd granted review, because the parties agree that the lower courts answer to that question was incorrect. Devas then filed suit in federal court in the United States seeking to confirm the arbitration award. Antrix Corp.
The Supreme Court has not yet granted writ of certiorari in any patent cases this term. Rather, any new grant this term will very likely be pushed back to the October 2022 Term for hearing and decision. Still, there are a number of important patent cases pending before the court. by Dennis Crouch. Lets talk them through.
The Supreme Court today finds a 2018 statute did not violate the California Constitution in eliminating the possibility of transfer to adult criminal court of almost all prosecutions for crimes committed by 14- and 15-year-olds. Coverage of the decision: Bob Egelko in the San Francisco Chronicle.
Last year, the Supreme Court trimmed the scope of that law, unanimously ruling that one of its reforms does not apply to certain low-level crack-cocaine offenders. Some courts look solely at the revised statutory penalties for crack cocaine to decide whether a new sentence is warranted. A divided panel of the U.S.
Kirschenbaum — In November 2020, we blogged about a decision by the Federal District Court of Maryland dismissing a Federal False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam suit alleging that Forest Laboratories knowingly reported inflated best prices under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program (MDRP), resulting in underpayment of rebates. Burr , 551 U.S.
Natural Resources Defense Council , determines when a federal court must defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers. First, under step one, if the court determines Congress’ intent is clear and unambiguous in the statute, the court will interpret the statute according to its terms, without deferring to the agency.
Supreme Court struck down the Chevron doctrine in its recent decision in Relentless v. Facts of the Case The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the two cases to address whether Chevron U.S.A. Supreme Court’sDecision The Supreme Court expressly overruled Chevron. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. ,
Aereo finally lost a courtdecision. See our summary of the NY decision here ). The Utah Court issued an injunction preventing Aereo from operating in Utah until the issue is decided by the Supreme Court. . (See See our summary of the NY decision here ).
Employers can find themselves defending claims from the same aggrieved worker in multiple legal proceedings as a result of a new Divisional Courtdecision.
The Supreme CourtDecision in Citizens United v. Because the station cannot censor the candidate ad (except in the exceptionally rare situation where the airing of the ad might violate a Federal felony statute), the broadcaster has no liability for the contents of the ad.
Supreme Court held that the penalty for the nonwillful failure to file a Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) is $10,000 per report rather than per account. The statute imposes a maximum $10,000 penalty for nonwillful violations of the law. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the government’s assessment.
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