Government Litigating Prima Facie Case 
Day on Torts
OCTOBER 3, 2022
Defendant filed a petition for dismissal pursuant to the TPPA, and after finding that the TPPA applied, that plaintiff was a limited-purpose public figure in the context of this action, and that plaintiff “had not established a prima facie case for actual malice,” the trial court dismissed the case. The TPPA, Tenn.
Day on Torts
NOVEMBER 15, 2022
When a litigant has filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act (TPPA), that motion should be analyzed under the provisions of the TPPA rather than under the traditional Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12 analysis. months after oral arguments in this case. In Reiss v. Rock Creek Construction, Inc. ,
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Patently O
NOVEMBER 29, 2023
Vidal (No 23-135): This case challenges the “ Fintiv rule” that restricts the initiation of inter partes review in cases where parallel district court litigation is pending. 23-315): This case questions the Federal Circuit’s interpretation of time limits for joining IPR partes. Traxcell Techs.
Conflict of Laws
OCTOBER 1, 2024
This is a significant turning point in the intersection of arbitration and cross-border litigation in India since the remedy of anti-enforcement injunction is rarely granted by judicial authorities across jurisdictions. However, the Delhi High Court’s decision to grant one in this case marks an interesting departure from this reluctance.
At the Lectern
DECEMBER 12, 2024
The order granting the reconsideration petition was made more than 60 days after the petition’s filing, and the then-governing statute provided a petition “is deemed to have been denied. unless it is acted upon within 60 days from the date of filing. ” (Link added.)
JonathanTurley
FEBRUARY 26, 2023
Dickson and Right to Life East Texas moved to dismiss both suits under the Texas Citizens Participation Act, which states that a court “shall dismiss” a legal action based on the defendant’s exercise of the right to free speech, unless “clear and specific evidence” establishes “a prima facie case for each essential element of the claim in question.”
Above The Law
JANUARY 24, 2025
Decision The court concluded that Lewis failed to make a prima facie case for discrimination because her comparators were not “similarly situated in all material respects.” This aligns with a judicial preference for limiting the scope of civil rights suits against government officials. suing Snap Inc.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
59 
Let's personalize your content