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 ...
The Supreme Court will decide if historic holiday pay claims can be brought where there are gaps of three months or more between a series of underpayments. The outcome could have significant implications for employers across the UK ...
A month after nixing the “objectively reasonable interpretation” (Safeco) defense under the False Claims Act, the Supreme Court has vacated and remanded two other cases for further consideration of the defendant’s subjective state of mind when it filed payment claims with the government. The Fourth Circuit in Sheldon and the Eleventh Circuit in Olhausen will provide the first tests of the High Court’s newly minted FCA intent standard ...
United States v. Arthrex, Inc., et al, Appeal No. 2019-1434 (Fed. Cir. June 21, 2021) The Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision today on the constitutionality of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The Court held that the Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) who make up the majority of the PTAB are not constitutionally appointed under the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution ...
Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., et al, No. 20-440 (S. Ct. June 29, 2021) The Supreme Court issued a decision today upholding the validity of the doctrine of assignor estoppel and clarifying its proper limits. The Court held that the doctrine only applies when “the assignor’s claim of invalidity contradicts explicit or implicit representations he made in assigning the patent ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
The Twenty-first Amendment—which repealed Prohibition—gives states broad authority to regulate alcohol within their borders. But can states impose residency requirements on alcohol retail licensees? The U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of seven to two in Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Ass’n v. Thomas, answered no. As state alcohol regulators adjust their licensing processes to comply with the ruling, retailers and wholesalers may see changes in the alcohol market ...
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 ...
On May 15, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the long-standing federal policy favoring arbitration agreements. In a lawsuit brought against skilled nursing provider Kindred Nursing Centers, LP, the Court held that states cannot single out arbitration clauses for “disfavored treatment,” because doing so violates the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The case involved two wrongful death lawsuits that were consolidated in the Kentucky Supreme Court ...
On February 19, 2020, The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern district, issued its opinion in Roverano v. John Crane, Inc. and Brand Insulations, Inc. on two critical questions: 1. the applicability of the Pennsylvania Fair Share Act, 42 Pa.C.S. Section 7102, to strict liability asbestos cases pending in the Commonwealth’s courts; and 2. Inclusion of bankrupt entities on the verdict sheet for purposes of liability only ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
Last month, the Supreme Court decided TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, which narrowed the definition of where a corporate defendant "resides" for the purpose of suing it for patent infringement. In doing so, it overturned the 1994 holding of the Federal Circuit of what constitutes proper venue in patent infringement cases. Federal law allows a Plaintiff to bring a patent infringement suit against a defendant in any district where one of two conditions are met ...
The Supreme Court, in Minerva Surgical, Inc., v. Hologic, Inc., et al., Case No. 20-440, recently upheld the doctrine of assignor estoppel, but severely limited its reach. The Court limited assignor estoppel to not apply in the cases of a “common employment arrangement” with an employer and employee, when there is a change in law, and when the issued patent has “materially broader” claims than the assigned invention ...
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 ...
“Public service is a noble calling” that requires great sacrifice, often requiring public officials to surrender personal conveniences in favor of public business ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
