On December 14, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Texas v. New Mexico, holding that New Mexico was entitled to delivery credit under the Pecos River Compact for water stored at the request of Texas that evaporated during...more
On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided McGirt v. Oklahoma, No. 18-9526, holding that the Creek Nation’s reservation in northeastern Oklahoma, which includes most of the city of Tulsa, has never been...more
7/13/2020
/ Criminal Convictions ,
Disestablishment ,
Federal Jurisdiction ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Fee Simple ,
Land Titles ,
Major Crimes Act ,
McGirt v Oklahoma ,
Native American Issues ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Treaties ,
Tribal Lands
On June 29, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Agency for International Development, et al. v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc., et al., No. 19-177, holding that Congress may lawfully condition...more
7/1/2020
/ Constitutional Challenges ,
First Amendment ,
Foreign Affiliates ,
Foreign Aid ,
NGOs ,
Non-Citizens ,
Policies and Procedures ,
Prostitution ,
Public Health ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Sex Trafficking ,
The Leadership Act ,
United States Agency for International Development v Alliance for Open Society International Inc
On January 14, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander, No. 18-1165, remanding the case to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to decide whether to address the views of...more
1/15/2020
/ Appeals ,
Breach of Duty ,
Corporate Officers ,
Dismissals ,
Duty of Prudence ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Employee Stock Purchase Plans ,
ESOP ,
Failure To Disclose ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
FIfth Third Bancorp v Dudenhoeffer ,
Fraud ,
Inflated Projections ,
Insider Information ,
Misrepresentation ,
Plan Participants ,
Pleading Standards ,
Popular ,
Remand ,
Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v Jander ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Securities Violations ,
Vacated
On January 14, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC, No. 18-938, holding that an order unreservedly ruling on a creditor’s motion for relief from bankruptcy’s...more
1/15/2020
/ Appeals ,
Automatic Stay ,
Bankruptcy Court ,
Commercial Bankruptcy ,
Creditors ,
Debtors ,
Dismissals ,
Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure ,
Motion for Relief from Automatic Stay ,
Reaffirmation ,
Right To Appeal ,
Ritzen Group Inc v Jackson Masonry LLC ,
SCOTUS ,
Time-Barred Claims
On December 11, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., No. 18-801, holding that Section 145 of the Patent Act does not require dissatisfied patent applicants who file a civil action in...more
12/12/2019
/ American Rule ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Civil Claims ,
Fee-Shifting ,
Litigation Fees & Costs ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Applicants ,
Peter v NantKwest Inc ,
Prevailing Party ,
Remedies ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 145 ,
Summary Judgment ,
USPTO
On December 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Rotkiske v. Klemm, et al., No. 18-328, holding that the one-year statute of limitations set out in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) begins to...more
12/11/2019
/ Cause of Action Accrual ,
Credit Cards ,
Debt Collectors ,
Default Judgment ,
Discovery Rule ,
Equitable Tolling ,
FDCPA ,
Rotkiske v. Klemm ,
SCOTUS ,
Service of Process ,
Statute of Limitations
On June 27, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Department of Commerce v. New York, No. 18-966, holding that the Constitution’s Enumeration Clause allowed the government to ask census questions about citizenship, but the...more
6/28/2019
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
Census ,
Citizenship ,
Department of Commerce v New York ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
Discovery ,
Enumeration Clause ,
National Origin Discrimination ,
Race Discrimination ,
Remand ,
U.S. Commerce Department ,
Undocumented Immigrants ,
Voting Rights Act
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided Iancu v. Brunetti, No. 18-302, holding that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering federal trademarks that are “immoral” or “scandalous” violates the First...more
6/25/2019
/ Appeals ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Iancu v. Brunetti ,
Lanham Act ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal ,
Scandalous/Immoral Marks ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO ,
Viewpoint Discrimination
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided Dutra Group v. Batterton, No. 18-266, holding that a plaintiff may not recover punitive damages on a claim of unseaworthiness.
Christopher Batterton worked as a...more
On June 24, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, No. 18–481, holding that commercial or financial information that is customarily and actually treated as private by its owner and...more
6/25/2019
/ Appeals ,
Confidential Information ,
Congressional Intent ,
Exemptions ,
FOIA ,
Food Marketing Institute v Argus Leader Media ,
Motion to Compel ,
Private Commercial or Financial Information ,
Protected Disclosures ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
SNAP Program ,
Statutory Interpretation ,
Substantial-Competitive-Harm Test ,
Trade Secrets ,
USDA
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., No. 17-1705, holding that whether the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2006 order interpreting the...more
6/21/2019
/ Administrative Orders ,
Administrative Procedure ,
Appellate Courts ,
Binding Precedent ,
Dismissals ,
Due Process ,
Exclusive Jurisdiction ,
FCC ,
Hobbs Act ,
Interpretive Rule ,
Judicial Review ,
Legislative Rule ,
PDR Network LLC v Carlton & Harris Chiropractic Inc ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Set-Asides ,
TCPA ,
Unsolicited Advertisements ,
Unsolicited Faxes ,
Vacated
On June 17, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren, concluding that Virginia may ban uranium mining within its borders because the federal Atomic Energy Act (AEA) does not preempt State mining...more
6/18/2019
/ Atomic Energy Act ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Mining ,
Nuclear Power ,
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ,
Preemption ,
Public Health ,
Public Safety ,
Reaffirmation ,
Regulatory Authority ,
SCOTUS ,
States Rights ,
Uranium Mining Ban ,
Virginia Uranium Inc v Warren
On June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Return Mail, Inc. v. Postal Service, No. 17-1594, holding that the United States Postal Service is not “a person” able to seek post-issuance review of...more
On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, No. 18-525, holding that the charge-filing precondition to suit of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not a...more
6/5/2019
/ Affirmative Defenses ,
Amended Complaints ,
Appeals ,
Charge-Filing Preconditions ,
Civil Rights Act ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Forfeiture ,
Fort Bend County Texas v Davis ,
Jurisdictional Requirements ,
Mandatory Claim-Processing Rules ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reasonable Accommodation ,
Religious Discrimination ,
Retaliation ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Title VII ,
Waiver Rule ,
Wrongful Termination
On May 20, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, No. 17-290, holding that the judge, not the jury, must decide whether state-law failure-to-warn claims are preempted by...more
5/22/2019
/ Agency Disapproval ,
Clear Evidence Standard ,
Failure To Warn ,
FDA Approval ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Judicial Authority ,
Jury Trial ,
Manufacturers ,
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht ,
Preemption ,
Prescription Drugs ,
Question of Fact ,
Question of Law ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
State Law Claims ,
Vacated ,
Warning Labels
On April 1, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Biestek v. Berryhill, No. 17-1184, holding that a Social Security Administration (SSA) vocational expert’s opinion may constitute “substantial evidence” supporting an administrative...more
4/2/2019
/ Administrative Hearings ,
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Appeals ,
Biestek v Berryhill ,
Denial of Benefits ,
Disability Benefits ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Failure To Disclose ,
Reaffirmation ,
SCOTUS ,
Social Security Benefits ,
Substantial Evidence ,
Substantial Evidence Standard ,
Vocational Experts
On March 27, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Lorenzo v. SEC, No. 17-1077, holding that a defendant who disseminates false or misleading statements to potential investors with the intent to defraud can violate Securities and...more
3/28/2019
/ Appeals ,
Enforcement Actions ,
False Statements ,
Fines ,
Intent to Defraud ,
Investment Banks ,
Lorenzo v SEC ,
Material Dissemination ,
Misleading Statements ,
Reaffirmation ,
Rule 10b-5 ,
SCOTUS ,
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ,
Securities Violations ,
Suspensions
On March 26, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Republic of Sudan v. Harrison et al., No. 16-1094, holding that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) requires a mailing to be sent directly to the foreign...more
3/27/2019
/ Appeals ,
Foreign Minister ,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) ,
Foreign Sovereigns ,
International Litigation ,
Remand ,
Republic of Sudan v Harrison ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Service by Mail ,
Service of Process
On March 26, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Sturgeon v. Frost, No. 17-949, holding that the federal government does not own a navigable water that traverses a national park in Alaska, so the water is not “public land” under...more
3/27/2019
/ ANILCA ,
Exemptions ,
Lack of Authority ,
National Park Service ,
Navigable Waters ,
Non-Public Land ,
Regulatory Authority ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Rivers ,
SCOTUS ,
State and Local Government ,
States Rights ,
Sturgeon v Frost ,
Vessels
On June 26, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Hawaii, upholding President Trump’s “travel ban,” which restricts admission to the United States for citizens of certain countries.
Presidential Proclamation No....more
6/27/2018
/ Appeals ,
Establishment Clause ,
Foreign Nationals ,
Immigration and Nationality Act ,
Immigration Reform ,
Likelihood of Success ,
Muslims ,
National Origin Discrimination ,
Presidential Decrees ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Travel Ban ,
Trump Administration ,
Trump v Hawaii
On June 18, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Gill v. Whitford, No. 16-1161, holding that where voters assert that a state’s legislative districts have been improperly gerrymandered, those voters lack...more
6/20/2018
/ Appeals ,
Article III ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
First Amendment ,
Fourteenth Amendment ,
Gerrymandering ,
Gill v Whitford ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Political Parties ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Standing ,
Vacated ,
Voting Rights
On June 18, 2018, the Supreme Court decided Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, No. 17-21, holding in a 8-1 decision that the petitioner need not prove the absence of probable cause to maintain a § 1983 claim of retaliatory...more
6/20/2018
/ 42 U.S.C. §1983 ,
Appeals ,
City Councils ,
Free Speech ,
Lozman v City of Riviera Beach Florida ,
Private Right of Action ,
Probable Cause ,
Public Comment ,
Retaliation ,
Retaliatory Arrests ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS
On June 14, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, No. 16-1435, holding that Minnesota’s ban on the wearing of political apparel in the polling place violates the Free Speech...more
6/15/2018
/ Appeals ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Minnesota Voters Alliance v Mansky ,
Non-Public Forum ,
Political Apparel Ban ,
Polling Place ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Viewpoint Discrimination
On June 14, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., No. 16-1220, holding that a federal court determining foreign law under Fed. R. Civ. P....more
6/15/2018
/ Animal Science Products Inc v Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co Ltd ,
Antitrust Violations ,
Application of Foreign Laws ,
China ,
Comity ,
Exports ,
FRCP Rule 44.1 ,
Judicial Deference ,
Price-Fixing ,
Question of Law ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Sherman Act