SCOTUSBlog
JANUARY 16, 2022
Court of Restitution, which, in 1954, declared her the rightful owner of the painting. It eventually travelled to New York and then to Saint Louis, Missouri, where it remained until 1976. In 2005, after his petition was denied, Claude sued in federal district court in California, where he had lived since 1980. 1605(a)(3) ).
JonathanTurley
OCTOBER 30, 2022
Here is my annual list of Halloween torts and crimes. Halloween has everything for a torts-filled holiday: battery, trespass, defamation, nuisance, product liability and more. However, my students and I often discuss the remarkably wide range of torts that comes with All Hallow’s Eve.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
JonathanTurley
OCTOBER 31, 2021
Here is my annual list of Halloween torts and crimes. Halloween has everything for a torts-filled holiday: battery, trespass, defamation, nuisance, product liability and more. A tort action for intentional infliction of emotional distress is likely to fail. Again, the court agreed.
JonathanTurley
DECEMBER 6, 2023
Missouri does not appear to have a formal retraction law, but it is still considered a necessary step. The use of the headdress could be treated by a court as opinion since many denounce such images as cultural appropriation. In 1967, the Supreme Court handed down Time, Inc. He can claim that this was merely an opinion.
Conflict of Laws
AUGUST 24, 2023
Claude Cassirer brought suit in federal court in California eighteen years ago against the Thyssen Bornemisza Museum of Madrid, Spain, to recover a painting by Camille Pissarro that was stolen from his grandmother by the Nazis during World War II. It is cross-posted at Transnational Litigation Blog. After a reversal and remand from the U.S.
SCOTUSBlog
FEBRUARY 23, 2024
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. The Supreme Court took care of a lot of relist business at its last conference, denying review in four serially relisted cases, in each instance with separate writings from the justices. The court denied Trevino v.
Constitutional Law Reporter
JANUARY 31, 2022
The Supreme Court’s January sitting started off with the late addition of two cases challenging vaccine mandates imposed by the Biden Administration. The central issue before the Court in both cases is whether the vaccine mandates should be allowed to move forward while the legal challenges work their way through the lower courts.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
.png)
125 
Let's personalize your content