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 US Supreme Court announced Monday it would hear Wilkins v. Wilson deals with the QTA’s 12 year statute of limitations for claimants and asks whether the statute of limitations is a jurisdictional rule or a claim-processing rule. However, a claim-processing rule allows for exceptions and more discretion for courts.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. The APA gives anyone who is injured by an agency’s action the right to go to court to challenge the action, but plaintiffs must file their challenges “within six years after the right of action first accrues.”
Last week the Supreme Court of NorthDakota handed down its opinion in Northwest Landowners Association v. State of NorthDakota, 2022 ND 150. The court struck down portions of a statute passed by the NorthDakota Legislature, Senate Bill 2344, dealing with ownership rights to “pore space.”
The US Supreme Court Thursday ruled in Boechler v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue that the 30-day time limit for taxpayers to seek review from the Tax Court of “collection due process” determinations is a nonjurisdictional deadline that can be equitably tolled. Justice Barrett delivered the unanimous opinion of the court.
Share The Supreme Court on Friday issued orders from its so-called “long conference” – the justices’ private conference in the last week of September, at which they met for the first time since the end of June to add new cases to their docket. The trial court rejected that argument, and the California Court of Appeals agreed.
Tax Court has the power to excuse the missed deadline for equitable reasons, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday in a unanimous decision. a NorthDakota law firm, of intent to levy on Boechler’s property to satisfy a tax penalty. Grammar – or more specifically, lack thereof – was key to the court’s decision.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue will consider whether “equitable tolling” – which allows courts to excuse missed deadlines in some circumstances – is available for a statutory federal income tax deadline. Courts of Appeals for the 8th and 9th Circuits concluding that tolling is not available, and the U.S. The deadline was Aug.
That has been interpreted to mean that an ad sponsored by a legally qualified candidate for public office must be run by a station as presented to the station, absent the ad itself violating some federal criminal statute (e.g.,
Supreme Court held that the Quiet Title Act’s statute of limitations is a claim-processing rule rather than a bright-line rule that constrains a court’s jurisdiction. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote on behalf of the Court. NorthDakota ex rel. In Wilkins v. United States , 598 U.S. _ (2023), the U.S.
One Afghanistan-based company sues another in commercial court in Afghanistan. The Afghanistan Supreme Court reverses. It offers insights into best drafting practices for choice-of-court clauses. courts decide whether these clauses should be enforced. Undeterred, NWTC filed suit against RMA in state court in Michigan.
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the U.S. Circuit also rejected EPA’s argument that the court did not have authority to review stays issued under Section 307(d)(7)(D) of the Clean Air Act. The court therefore found that the stay was unauthorized and vacated it. FEATURED CASE. A divided D.C. Clean Air Council v. Pruitt , No.
The Texas Supreme Court upheld a statutory ban on gender-affirming care for minors on Friday. The Texas Supreme Court found that SB 14 does not infringe on the parental right to make medical care decisions for their children because that right competes with the interest of protecting children from harm.
The NorthDakota Supreme Court Thursday upheld a preliminary injunction on the state’s abortion ban while litigation on the matter proceeds. 31-12 , which went into effect after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. The injunction stops enforcement of N.D.C.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that a NorthDakota truck stop can bring a challenge to a regulation issued 13 years ago by the Federal Reserve Board. A federal district court dismissed the case. A federal appeals court upheld the district court’s dismissal of the case, but the Supreme Court on Monday reversed.
A group of 12 Republican US senators sent a letter to International Criminal Court (ICC) Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, threatening repercussions if the court issues arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other officials, according a Monday report from news organization Zeteo.
Bankruptcy Court Said California City and Counties Could Not Sue Coal Company for Climate Change Impacts. A federal bankruptcy court in Missouri enjoined San Mateo and Marin Counties and the City of Imperial Beach (the plaintiffs) from pursuing their climate change lawsuits against Peabody Energy Corporation (Peabody). FEATURED CASE.
The US Supreme Court released orders Friday and Monday after its September “long conference.” ” The court granted certiorari for 12 cases Friday and two cases Monday for its Winter term, to be argued in January or February. The court also granted dozens of procedural orders in other ongoing cases.
Federal Court Denied Oakland and San Francisco Motions to Return Climate Change Nuisance Cases to State Court; Found Federal Common Law of Nuisance Could Apply, Despite AEP v. The court dispensed with the cities’ three primary arguments for remanding the cases. HERE ARE THE ADDITIONS TO THE CLIMATE CASE CHART SINCE UPDATE # 107.
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the U.S. The court therefore vacated and remanded the ACE Rule—which repealed the 2015 Clean Power Plan rule and in its place adopted a replacement rule that relied only on heat-rate improvements at individual plants. On January 19, 2021, the D.C. Third, the D.C. American Lung Association v.
She explains the holding that the NorthDakota convenience store’s lawsuit against the Fed over interchange fees for debit card transactions was not time-barred under the default six-year federal statute of limitations. and the chief justice says, “I have the opinion of the court in No. It is now 10:28 a.m.,
Several states and private plaintiffs went to federal court to challenge the plan, and in February 2016 the Supreme Court, dividing 5-4, put the plan on hold before it could go into effect. Two coal-mining companies and 20 Republican-led states, including West Virginia and NorthDakota, asked the Supreme Court to review the D.C.
Louisiana Federal Court Blocked Biden Administration “Pause” on New Oil and Gas Leases. The federal district court for the Western District of Louisiana issued a nationwide preliminary injunction barring the Biden administration from implementing a “Pause” on new oil and natural gas leases on public lands or in offshore waters.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of New York City’s lawsuit seeking climate change damages from oil companies. The Second Circuit’s decision largely followed the reasoning of the district court’s 2018 decision. and Minnesota Federal Courts Remanded Climate Cases Against Fossil Fuel Industry.
Share The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming conference. But I’ll be even more summary than usual today because of the press of business We finally may have gotten an explanation why the court rescheduled Dignity Health, Inc. In addition, the court relisted: Boardman v.
Washington Supreme Court Said Climate Activist Was Entitled to Present Necessity Defense Based on Evidence that Legal Alternatives Were Not “Truly Reasonable”. The Supreme Court reversed an intermediate appellate court’s decision affirming a superior court determination that the defendant could not present a necessity defense.
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