Rhode Island Statute Tort 
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 25, 2025
Konan to determine whether the Federal Tort Claims Act provision exempting claims arising from the loss or miscarriage of letters or postal matter extends to claims that the Post Office deliberately refused to deliver mail to an address. The Supreme Court made short work of two of last weeks first-time relists. 17 conferences.)
SCOTUSBlog
APRIL 17, 2025
Konan sued the USPS under the Federal Tort Claims Act, asserting claims under Texas law for nuisance, tortious interference, conversion, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. It reasoned that loss and miscarriage cover intentional acts, as the statute only qualifies transmission with negligent. But the U.S.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
JonathanTurley
NOVEMBER 21, 2021
It evolved into a common-law tort to address a broader range of “interests of the community at large—interests that were recognized as rights of the general public entitled to protection,” in the words of the American Law Institute’s Second Restatement of Torts (1965-79). The same result was seen in nuisance claims on lead paint.
SCOTUSBlog
JANUARY 23, 2025
United States , 24-25 Issue: Whether the Sixth Amendment reserves to juries the determination of any fact underlying a criminal restitution order. Relisted after the Jan. 10 and Jan. 17 conferences.) Ocean State Tactical, LLC v. Relisted after the Jan. 10 and Jan. 17 conferences.) Relisted after the Jan. 10 and Jan 17 conferences.)
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
OCTOBER 7, 2019
Rhode Island Federal Court Denied Motion to Stay Remand Order in Rhode Island’s Climate Change Case. Rhode Island v. The court said the laws’ provision for criminal or tort liability for advising, encouraging, or soliciting persons participating in a riot to acts of force or violence was overbroad and vague.
ClimateChange-ClimateLaw
FEBRUARY 10, 2020
The defendants filed their reply brief on January 22, 2020, reiterating their arguments that the Tenth Circuit should review the entire remand order, not just the district court’s determination that removal was not proper under the federal-officer removal statute, and that there were multiple valid grounds for removal. Rhode Island v.
SCOTUSBlog
JANUARY 16, 2025
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit affirmed , holding that because a federal agency now has the final say over how the private horse-racing authority implements the federal statute, the amended law did not impermissibly delegate authority to a private entity. In a one-paragraph order, the justices granted the authoritys request. Franklin v.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
78 
Let's personalize your content