4,287 results found

On June 26, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court (Supreme Court) agreed to hear arguments in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., No. 04-1350.

Yesterday the Supreme Court issued its decision in Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. 16-534 (Feb. 21, 2018), affirming the Seventh Circuit by holding that a provision of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, ...

Plaintiffs not initially affected by a regulation may now bring an Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") challenge to the regulation up to six years after they are first affected.

The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit heard oral argument concerning an injunction that would grant student-athletes in the 2022 freshman class a fifth year of eligibility under the NCAA's new "Five for Five" rule. The case centers on whether the NCAA's decision not to apply its new eligibility rule retroactively to the 2022 class violates their rights, while many fifth-year football players remain sidelined pending the court's decision.

Yesterday the Fifth Circuit released Janvey v. Alguire (pdf), another chapter the ongoing litigation over R. Allen Stanford and his alleged Ponzi scheme.

A previous post in this blog reported that the Georgia Court of Appeals decided in Cherokee Funding, LLC v. Ruth, Case No. A17A0132 (decided June 27, 2017) ...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted a rehearing of its recent decision in <EM>Linear Technology Corp. v. Impala Linear Corp., et al</EM>., for the limited purpose of correcting the Court’s reporting of the district court’s decision regarding Linear’s motion for summary judgment that Vinsant was not an inventor of the `178 patent.

On April 18, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Schutte v. SuperValu and Proctor v. Safeway, two qui tam cases raising significant questions about the knowledge...

On March 12, 2014, the Pennsylvania Superior Court in Cordes v. Associates of Internal Medicine et. al. vacated a defense verdict in a medical malpractice case based upon the trial court’s failure to strike 3 prospective jurors for cause.

Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co., 486 U.S. 196 (1988), established that a district court’s decision resolving the merits of a case is final for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and must be appealed within 30 days, even if an unresolved motion for attorney’s fees is pending in the district court.

After nearly five years of contentious international arbitration, a Michigan-based manufacturer of adjustable bed bases and mattresses secured a substantial monetary judgment against its Taiwan-based supplier and the supplier's parent company. The case involved complex evidence, intricate legal issues, and Mandarin translation of documents and testimony, ultimately resulting in the confirmation of multiple arbitration awards by a federal district court.

Texas law requires plaintiffs to prove medical expenses are reasonable and necessary, but post-2018 case law has complicated discovery by making third-party payor information potentially relevant.

A Colorado federal district court has ruled that text messages do not constitute telephone calls under the TCPA's Do Not Call provision, joining 16 other federal districts in this interpretation. The decision in Radvansky v. 1st Class Medical dismissed claims based entirely on text messages, relying heavily on Seventh Circuit precedent and contemporaneous dictionary definitions from when the TCPA was enacted.

A little heads up to readers in the Dallas area. The Appellate Record will be on the road, live and in person at the Dallas Bar Association Appellate Law Section on June 16. The seminar will be at the Belo Mansion at high noon

The Washington Supreme Court's April ruling in Vargas v. RRA CP Opportunity Trust 1 prohibited nonjudicial foreclosure on Home Equity Lines of Credit (HELOCs), but after granting reconsideration and withdrawing its original opinion, the legal landscape remains uncertain. Lenders now face ambiguity about which instruments qualify for nonjudicial foreclosure under the Deed of Trust Act, creating widespread confusion about enforcement mechanisms. What does this mean for creditors attempting to collect on HELOC

The Mississippi Department of Revenue has amended several sales and use tax regulations following a state Supreme Court ruling that challenged the Department's authority to impose use tax on third-party freight charges. These regulatory changes eliminate provisions that had been in place for years, fundamentally altering how businesses must handle use tax accruals on shipping and delivery expenses paid to parties other than the seller of goods.

Beata Shapiro (Partner-Boston, MA) authored “The Impact of the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, No. 24-1238: Supreme Court Allows State Negligent Hiring Claims Against Brokers,”...