Firm: All
Practice Industry: Government & Public Sector, Transportation
Region: All
Country/ State: All
Tag: All

[!<CDATA[ This term the Supreme Court is set to resolve a circuit split over the extent of a federal district court’s power to order a person “who resides in or is found” in its district “to give testimony or statement or to produce a document or other thing for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal” pursuant to 28 U.S.C Section 1782(a) ...

Hanson Bridgett LLP | July 2017

We previously reported on recent efforts to rescind the Obama Administration’s rule amending the Clean Water Act’s “waters of the United States” (“WOTUS”) definition. This followed, as we also reported, the Sixth Circuit’s nationwide stay of the Obama Administration’s WOTUS rule ...

Waller | January 2022

Today, the Supreme Court issued decisions in the COVID mandate cases that have had employers across the country on the edge of their seats. In aper curiam6-3 decision, the Court stayed the OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard that required all employers with 100 or more employees to require COVID vaccination or weekly testing ...

Hanson Bridgett LLP | August 2020

Key Points Adoption of Water Rates not subject to challenge by referendum; challenges are limited to those provided for by Proposition 218. California Supreme Court overrules Court of Appeal decision that found that water rates are not a "tax" under Article II, Section 9. Supreme Court disagrees, finding municipal water rates fall within the broad understanding of the term "tax," and referendum cannot be used to disrupt essential government services ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | June 2020

On June 18, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not follow appropriate administrative procedures to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and, therefore, was unauthorized to do so. The decision was a 5-4 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor ...

Dykema | June 2021

On June 17, the Supreme Court rejected another court challenge to the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge its minimum essential coverage provisions. For the third time, the Supreme Court upheld the ACA. More than a decade after the ACA was enacted, the long and winding road of ACA challenges may be over and healthcare industry participants may finally be able to rely on the ACA as settled law moving forward ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | June 2024

In a unanimous decision today, the Supreme Court rejected efforts to limit access to the abortion pill mifepristone, overturning an earlier decision by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court ruled that the physicians and medical associations who brought the case did not have the right to challenge the FDA's regulation of the drug. To have standing, plaintiffs must show they have a “personal stake” in the case ...

Lavery Lawyers | April 2024

On April 19, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision in Société des casinos du Québec inc. v. Association des cadres de la Société des casinos du Québec, marking the end of an almost 15 year-long debate on the freedom of association of managers and their exclusion under the Labour Code ...

Lawson Lundell LLP | April 2021

In its highly anticipated judgment, the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada found the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act constitutional in a split 6-3 decision. The key issue before the court was whether the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act (“GGPPA”) was constitutional. The majority decided that it was, because Parliament has jurisdiction to enact this law as a matter of national concern ...

Hanson Bridgett LLP | September 2020

Key Points A permitting agency's blanket designation of an entire category of permit decisions as ministerial for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) may be held to be improper if the agency has the ability to modify or deny the permit based on any concern that may be examined under CEQA review. Courts will afford a larger degree of deference to an agency’s designation of a single permit decision as ministerial on a case-by-case basis ...

Debtors hoping to discharge their obligations in bankruptcy may find a new hurdle based on the US Supreme Court’s Feb. 22 ruling. Relying on the plain language of the Bankruptcy Code, and Congress’s use of passive voice, the Supreme Court held that funds obtained through fraud, regardless of who committed such fraud, are not dischargeable through bankruptcy ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | July 2023

At the end of its 2023 term, the United States Supreme Court handed down several buzz-worthy decisions. Two opinions may have substantial and lasting impacts on employers and their efforts to promote diversity and inclusion. In Groff v. DeJoy, Postmaster General, the Court addressed religious accommodation and clarified the parameters of its “undue burden” standard set forth in its prior decision in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U. S. 63 (1977). 2023 U.S. LEXIS 2790 ...

This is a briefing on Supreme Court Administrative Matter No. 20-07-04-SC (2020 Interim Rules on Remote Notarization of Paper Documents) dated July 14, 20201 (“RON Rules”), a COVID-19 related issuance. In general, signatories of documents to be notarized have to appear before the notary generally at the latter’s place of business ...

Dykema | April 2020

The United States Supreme Court recently held that a plaintiff need not show that a defendant willfully infringed the plaintiff's trademark as a requirement for recovering the defendant’s profits.Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Grp., Inc., No. 18-1233, 2020 U.S. LEXIS 2408, at *12-13 (U.S. Apr. 23, 2020). Romag Fasteners, Inc. sued Fossil, Inc ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | July 2017

On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court held in California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc., that the three-year time limit in the Securities Act of 1933 is a statute of repose that is not subject to equitable tolling. This means that shareholders will not be able to rely on the filing of a proposed class action lawsuit to suspend the running of a statute of repose on their individual claims ...

The Supreme Court has issued Supreme Court Administrative Matter No. 20-12-01-SC (Re: Proposed Guidelines on the Conduct of Videoconferencing) dated December 9, 20201 (Court Videoconferencing Guidelines) to ensure that hearings via videoconferencing are conducted in an orderly manner and that the constitutional rights of the accused are protected ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | April 2020

The Supreme Court this past week denied certiorari in United States ex rel. Schneider v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., an appeal from a D.C. Circuit case affirming the district court’s dismissal of a qui tam FCA action. See No. 19-678, 2020 U.S. LEXIS 2079 (Apr. 6, 2020). In so doing, the Court declined to address the emerging circuit split over the extent of the government’s dismissal power in qui tam cases ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | March 2021

The Supreme Court has declined to take up the issue of False Claims Act (FCA) “objective falsity” in relation to medical opinions, denying certiorari in paired cases from the Third Circuit (United States ex rel. Druding v. Care Alternatives, Inc.)[1] and Ninth Circuit (Winter ex rel. United States v. Gardens Reg’l Hosp. & Med. Ctr., Inc.) ...

Dykema | June 2018

InLagos v. United States, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), the Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling that limits the ability of corporate victims of fraud to seek reimbursement of legal fees for internal investigations. The case began when GE Capital discovered that Sergio Lagos falsified numerous invoices for his company, which he used as collateral to obtain tens of millions of dollars in loans from GE Capital ...

On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., v. University of North Carolina (collectively “SFFA”) that Harvard and the University of North Carolina (“UNC”) violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by impermissibly considering race when making undergraduate admissions decisions ...

Under article 253(d) of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC), when an association, partnership or corporation commits an act or omission that violates the Tax Code, the penalty "shall be imposed on the partner, president, general manager, branch manager, treasurer, officer-in-charge, and the employees responsible for the violation". This means that any of the persons enumerated may be criminally prosecuted for the corporation or partnership's criminal act or omission under the code ...

Hanson Bridgett LLP | June 2017

Prior to imposing, extending, or increasing any tax, a public agency must submit the tax to a vote of the electorate. However, public agencies need no such approval to impose certain types of fees. In Jacks v. City of Santa Barbara, the Supreme Court considered whether and when municipal franchise fees—fees charged to utilities and others for the use of public rights of way—constitute taxes requiring voter approval ...

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP | October 2023

phttps://www.huntonak.com/images/content/9/3/v2/93738/sc-clarifies-undue-hardship-standard-for-title-vii-religious-acc ...

Dykema | January 2023

On January 23, 2023, after hearing an extensive oral argument, the Supreme Court dismissedIn re Grand Jury, 23 F.4th1088 (9th Cir. 2021),cert granted, 143 S. Ct. 80 (2022), a highly anticipated case about how the attorney-client privilege applies to “multipurpose” communications ...

dots