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 District of Columbia (DC) filed a civil lawsuit Tuesday against Proud Boys International, LLC and The Oath Keepers, a non-profit organization. DC is seeking compensatory, statutory and punitivedamages from the organizations for their involvement in the January 6 attack on the US Capitol.
A 25-person legal technology company in California is fighting back against one of the world’s largest law firms in a lawsuit over ownership rights to legislation-drafting software that each side says was its idea. This litigation should be a warning to all innovative legal technology providers.”. Series of Meetings.
The federal district court for the District of Columbia ruled that the U.S. The Second Circuit agreed with the district court that the plaintiff lacked standing because he failed to allege an injury in fact since he “never explained why he had any legal right to have the document distributed.” FEATURED CASE.
The amendments were challenged in a petition filed by 20 states, along with Chicago, Denver, and the District of Columbia, and in a second petition filed by 10 environmental groups. Federal Court Upheld State Department’s Invocation of FOIA Exception for Legal Memorandum Supporting Paris Agreement Request. BP America Inc. ,
The lawsuit filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that Giuliani’s defamatory statements gave rise to more than $650 million in damages, and the company seeks a total of $1.3 billion in damages, including punitivedamages. These lawsuits were largely failures.
The mining company argued that the district court should not have issued the injunction without hearing legal arguments and factual evidence on the appropriate remedy, and without weighing the mandatory factors for a mandatory injunction. Energy & Environment Legal Institute v. Attorney General of Vermont , No.
The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, where Mike Lindell and MyPillow advertised and promoted the Stop the Steal march on January 6. billion in damages in the lawsuit against Lindell, including about $650 million in punitivedamages and $650 million in compensatory damages.
Two Georgia election workers filed a complaint Thursday in the US District Court for the District of Columbia against Rudy Giuliani and One America News Network (“OAN”) for promoting claims that they engaged in election fraud during the vote-counting process in the state of Georgia during the 2020 presidential election.
The Ninth Circuit was not persuaded by the plaintiff states’ argument that “precedent requires a broad, fact-intensive inquiry into whether altering an injunction is equitable, even if the legal duty underlying the injunction has disappeared.” District of Columbia v. County of Maui v. Sunoco LP , No. 2CCV-20-0000283 (Haw.
Eric Swalwell against former President Donald Trump as a serious miscalculation that could result in a legal vindication for Trump either on the trial or appellate levels. The officers seek $75,000 in damages in their complaint but also ask for unspecified punitivedamages. I recently wrote about the lawsuit by Rep.
Circuit in 2016 signaled that the legal framework for the Clean Power Plan “hinges on important issues of federal that EPA then—and the court below now—got so wrong this Court was likely to grant review.” Circuit majority opinion’s interpretation was foreclosed by the statute and violated separation of powers. Biden , No. 19-35460 (9th Cir.
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