Last week, in Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the six-year statute of limitations that applies to facial challenges of agency action under the...more
On September 29, 2023, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy, a case that should resolve a split among the U.S. Courts of Appeal relating to the scope of damages available to copyright...more
During its 2023 legislative session, the Colorado General Assembly repealed the state's prior antitrust law — the Colorado Antitrust Act of 1992 — and passed the Colorado State Antitrust Act of 2023. On June 7, Colorado...more
On December 4, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Intel Corp. Inv. Policy Comm. v. Sulyma, 139 S. Ct. 2692 (2019). The question presented is whether the three year limitations period in 29 U.S.C. § 1113(2),...more
We noted earlier the Supreme Court’s review of the Third Circuit’s decision in Rotkiske v. Klemm regarding the statute of limitations for claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Again, this was a case...more
A&B ABstract: On December 10, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held that, absent the application of an equitable doctrine, the one-year statute of limitations for actions against debt collectors under the Fair Debt Collection...more
Rotkiske v. Klemm, 589 U.S. (2019) In a recent decision, the US Supreme Court ruled that a consumer claimant under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) has one year from the alleged violation to file...more
The Situation: The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA") allows plaintiffs to sue over abusive debt-collection practices within one year of "the date on which the violation occurs." 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). The U.S. Court...more
Not so long ago, federal courts began to hold that a federal statute of limitations did not run until the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known of his or her claim. This is commonly called the “discovery rule.” The...more
The Supreme Court of the United States (“Supreme Court”) recently affirmed the Third Circuit’s decision holding Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) claims are subject to a one-year statute of limitations from the...more
Earlier this year, this blog reported on the Supreme Court's grant of certiorari in Rotkiske v. Klemm to resolve a split in circuits on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act's (FDCPA) statute of limitations. This week, in an...more
In a victory for common sense, the Supreme Court has ruled, in Rotkiske v. Klemm, that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act’s statute of limitations begins to run when the alleged FDCPA violation occurs, not when the...more
In an 8-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Rotkiske v. Klemm that the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations (SOL) runs from the date of the alleged violation and not from a consumer’s discovery of the...more
On December 10, 2019, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Rotkiske v. Klemm, holding that, absent application of an equitable doctrine, the statute of limitations for a claim under the Fair Debt Collection...more
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
In a recent 9-0 decision issued by the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS), the Court has set to rest the applicable statutes of limitations for claims brought under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §3731(b) (FCA). Cochise...more
In Rotkiske v. Klemm, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to do what many plaintiffs’ attorneys have dreamed of for years: effectively expand the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations by applying the “discovery rule” to...more
The FDCPA requires that any lawsuit must be brought, if at all, “within one year from the date on which the violation” of the act occurs. 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). The US Supreme Court will hear argument this month in Rotkiske v....more
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided McDonough v. Smith, No. 18-485, holding that the statute of limitations for a fabricated-evidence claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983 begins to run when the criminal...more
We are keeping an eye on Rotkiske v. Klemm, which is currently pending at the U.S. Supreme Court. This case will likely resolve a circuit split on whether the “discovery rule” applies to toll the one-year statute of...more
On May 13, the US Supreme Court (the Court) unanimously ruled in Cochise Consultancy, Inc., v. U.S. ex rel. Hunt that the “government knowledge” statute of limitations under the federal False Claims Act (FCA), §31 U.S.C....more
On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Cochise Consultancy, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Hunt, wherein it recognized a prolonged statute of limitations for a qui tam relator bringing an action under...more
Health care providers, government contractors, and others who receive money from the federal government are at greater risk of suit under the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 et seq., following the Supreme Court’s...more
Recently, in Cochise Consultancy, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Hunt, the Supreme Court resolved a circuit split and clarified in a unanimous decision that the statute of limitations period for qui tam actions where the...more
On May 13, 2019, in a unanimous decision, the United States Supreme Court held that even in cases where the government does not intervene in a False Claims Act (FCA) action, a relator is entitled to rely on the portion of the...more