Category Archives: Litigation
|
SCOTUS Opinion: State Residency Requirement For Liquor Store Licenses Struck Down
Tennessee law required that to get a license to sell alcohol, the seller had to first be a Tennessee resident for two years. The state agency tasked with enforcing the law declined to do so after the state’s attorney general opined that the law violated the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. When two non-resident businesses applied for licenses, a ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Auer Deference To An Agency’s Interpretation Of Its Own Regulations Survives, Barely
In Kisor v. Wilke, the underlying case concerned a Vietnam War veteran’s quest for disability benefits. The Department of Veterans Affairs interpreted its internal rule to deny the veteran benefits going back to when he first applied. The Federal Circuit affirmed the determination using Auer deference, established by the Court in Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1997), ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Strikes Supervised Release Statute That Permitted Additional Prison Time Without A Jury Determination
In United States v. Haymond, Andre Haymond was found guilty by a jury of possessing child pornography, a crime that permitted a prison term of zero to 10 years. After serving his term and while on supervised release, Haymond was found with what appeared to be images of child pornography on his devices. Under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3583(k), a ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Strikes Down Violent Felony Residual Clause As Vague
Under 18 U.S.C. sec. 924(c)(3)(B), a defendant may receive a longer prison sentence for using a firearm in connection with a felony “that by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.” In prior cases, the Supreme Court struck down residual ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Clarifies What “Confidential” Information is not Subject to a Freedom of Information Act Request
In Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, a newspaper filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to the Department of Agriculture requesting information about retail stores who participate in the national food stamp program. The Department declined to provide store-level data on the basis that it was “confidential” and thus precluded from disclosure under ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Strikes Down Law Against Immoral or Scandalous Trademarks
The Lanham Act prohibits registration of any trademark that contains “immoral[] or scandalous matter.” In Iancu v. Brunetti, an applicant sought to trademark FUCT (pronounced F-U-C-T), but was denied by the Patent and Trademark Office. The applicant appealed, arguing that the Act’s restriction violated the First Amendment. The Federal Circuit struck down the restriction as unconstitutional. The Court, ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Vacates Murder Conviction Under Batson Challenge
In Flowers v. Mississippi, Curtis Flowers, a black man, was tried six times for allegedly murdering four people in a small town furniture store. The first three times, he was sentenced to death but the convictions were overturned. The fourth and fifth trials ended in mistrials. Throughout those trials, the prosecution used their peremptory strikes to remove all black ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Under Due Process Clause, State Cannot Tax Foreign Trust Solely Because A Beneficiary Resides In the State
A family trust was created in New York state, with the trustee also located in New York, to distribute assets to the children of the trust creator under the trustee’s sole discretion. One of those children moved to North Carolina. The trustee then divided the trust into three separate trusts, one for each child, retaining full power and discretion over ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Government Must Prove Immigrant Had Knowledge Of Unlawful Residence For Gun Possession Conviction
Under 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(a)(2), it is illegal for an immigrant “illegally or unlawfully in the United States” to possess firearms and “knowingly violates” that prohibition. In Rehaif v. United States, an immigrant entered the country on a nonimmigration student visa, but was dismissed for poor grades, making his further residence unlawful. He then went to a firing ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Permits Fifth Amendment Takings Claim Without First Seeking Compensation Under State Law
In the prior case of Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172 (1985), the Court ruled that before a property owner could bring a federal action against a state under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, the owner had to first seek just compensation under state law in state court ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Upholds Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act Against Delegation Challenge
The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act required all convicted sex offenders to register with the government. For those offenders convicted of a sex offense before the Act was enacted, the Act authorized the Attorney General to “specify the applicability” of the Act’s registration requirements and prescribe rules therefore. The Attorney General issued a rule applying the Act’s requirements ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Treats Fabrication Of Evidence Claim As Malicious Prosecution For Statute Of Limitations Purposes
In McDonough v. Smith, a commissioner of a county board of elections in New York was indicted by the district attorney for forging absentee ballots. The district attorney used fabricated evidence to secure a grand jury indictment, and used fabricated testimony at trial. After a mistrial, the commissioner was ultimately acquitted on all charges. Just under three years later, ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Permits The Bladensburg Peace Cross To Remain Standing
The Bladensburg Peace Cross was erected in 1925 on public land as a tribute to the lives of 49 soldiers from the local area who died in World War I. Certain atheistic groups filed suit in federal court, arguing that the cross violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. The district court dismissed the case under the tests set forth in ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Requires More Information Before Resolving “Junk Faxes” Case
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act prohibits “unsolicited advertisements.” The Federal Communications Commission issued an order in 2006 interpreting that term to “include any offer of a free good or service.” However, under the Hobbs Act, the federal courts of appeals have the exclusive jurisdiction to enjoin, set a side, suspend . . ., or to determine the validity ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Virginia’s House of Delegates Lacks Standing To Challenge Redistricting Order
After Virginia redrew its districts following the 2010 census, 11 of those districts were held to be unconstitutionally drawn as being racially gerrymandered. Virginia’s Attorney General, a Democrat, declined to appeal the ruling. However, the Virginia House of Delegates, controlled by the Republicans, chose to appeal that ruling directly to the Supreme Court, arguing that the districts were constitutional. Justice ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Retains Dual-Sovereignty Doctrine Exception To Double Jeopardy Rule
Under the Fifth Amendment, defendants may not be indicted for the same crime twice—otherwise known as double jeopardy. However, the Court had, since Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985), held that double jeopardy did not occur when the same offense was prosecuted by different sovereigns, thus creating the “dual-sovereignty doctrine.” In Gamble v. United States, Terance Gamble was ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Private Nonprofit Corporation Operating Public Access Channels Not A State Actor Subject To First Amendment
New York City designated Manhattan Neighborhood Network, a privately owned nonprofit corporation, to operate its public access channels on the cable system in Manhattan. Two filmmakers produced a film attacking the Network to be run on the public access channels. The Network aired the film, but then suspended the filmmakers from the Network’s services and facilities. The filmmakers sued, alleging ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Upholds Virginia Ban On Uranium Mining
Virginia law flatly bans uranium mining in the Commonwealth. In Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren, a company sought to circumvent that state law by arguing that the federal Atomic Energy Act preempted Virginia’s law, and put the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in charge of uranium mining. The company lost before the district court and the Fourth Circuit. The Supreme ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Broadens Definition Of Generic Burglary Under Armed Career Criminal Act
After Jamar Quarles pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, prosecutors sought to give him an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act because he had at least three prior “violent felony” convictions. The Act defines “burglary” as being a violent felony, meaning “unlawful or unprivileged entry into, or remaining in, a building or structure, ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: The Government Is Not A “Person” That Can Institute A Patent Review Under America Invents Act
The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act contains provisions allowing a “person” other than a patent owner to use three types of administrative review to challenge the validity of a patent after it has been issued, with appeal rights to the Federal Circuit. In Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, Return Mail obtained a patent for processing undeliverable ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Holds Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Preempts State Employment Law
Brian Newton worked on a drilling platform off the California coast, where his employer paid him for time on duty but not for his time on standby, when he could not leave the platform. He filed a class action in California state court, arguing that state law required the employer pay for standby time. The employer removed the case to ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Sets “No Objectively Reasonable Basis” Standard For Violation Of Bankruptcy Discharge Orders
After Bradley Taggart was civilly sued for violating a business operating agreement, but before the case went to trial, he filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and received a discharge. After the discharge was granted, the civil suit recommenced and Taggart lost. The winners sought their attorneys’ fees incurred after Taggart’s petition was filed, which normally were discharged unless Taggart had ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Medicare Act Requires Notice And Comment Before Any Changes To “Medicare Fraction”
Under the Medicare Act, the enforcing agency is required to go through a public notice and comment period before changing any “substantive legal standard” affecting Medicare benefits. 42 U.S.C. sec. 1395hh(a)(2). Under Medicare Part A, the federal government paid hospitals who served low-income patients through a “Medicare fraction,” which was calculated by dividing the time spent by a hospital ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Title VII Claims Not Limited To Those Made To Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
In Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, Lois M. Davis filed a charge of sexual harassment and retaliation for reporting the harassment with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). While the EEOC was investigating, the employer fired Davis when she went to a church function instead of work on Sunday. Davis handwrote “religion” on an intake questionnaire to ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Time Served On A New Conviction Tolls The Supervised Release Period
While on supervised release after serving time for violating federal law, Jason Mont was arrested under state law for drug trafficking. He entered into a plea agreement. After his supervised release period expired, he was sentenced in state court, and credited with time served. The federal court then issued a warrant based on his violation of his supervised release. Mont ... Read More
|
May Real Estate Update | SJ Enterprises, LLC v. Quander
On May 16, 2019, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals issued a new opinion in SJ Enterprises, LLC v. Quander that is of significant importance. In this matter, Dianne Quander leased commercial premises to SJ Enterprises, LLC for an initial term of five years with two additional five year renewal options. The initial term was set to expire on November ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Upholds Law Regarding Disposal Of Aborted Fetus Remains
Indiana passed a law preventing abortion providers from treating aborted fetuses as waste that could be incinerated with surgical byproducts, and also barred abortion providers from conducting abortions when the mother’s reason for aborting was sex, race, or disability selective. The Seventh Circuit invalidated both provisions, holding that the first was not rationally related to a legitimate government interest, and ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Third-Party Counterclaim Defendants Cannot Remove State Cases To Federal Courts
In Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson, Citibank filed a state debt-collection action against George Jackson for charges on his Home Depot card. Jackson counterclaimed against Citibank and filed third-party class-action counterclaims against Home Depot and another company, alleging a scheme in which those companies induced consumers to buy water treatment systems at inflated prices. Citibank dismissed its claims ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Probable Cause To Arrest Defeats A First Amendment Retaliatory Arrest Claim
In Nieves v. Bartlett, during a winter sports festival, an intoxicated Russell Bartlett confronted Sergeant Nieves who was talking to other attendees, and told the officer to leave. Nieves backed off, but later Bartlett physically interfered with another officer’s questioning of an attendee, and Nieves initiated arrest. Bartlett was slow to comply and was handcuffed on the ground. Bartlett ... Read More
|
SCOTUS Opinion: Court Clarifies “Clear Evidence” Standard For Failure-To-Warn Claims
Merck manufactured the drug Fosamax to combat osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Merck’s scientists theorized that use of Fosamax might cause atypical femoral fractures, but the drug label approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1995 did not include a warning for those fractures. After 1995, evidence of such fractures started to develop. In 2008, Merck applied to the FDA ... Read More