On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, No. 22-660, holding that whistleblowers do not need to establish retaliatory intent on the part of their employers in order to prove a claim...more
On June 15, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians et al. v. Coughlin, No. 22-227, holding that the Bankruptcy Code unambiguously abrogates the sovereign immunity of all...more
6/19/2023
/ Appeals ,
Bankruptcy Code ,
Bankruptcy Court ,
Chapter 11 ,
FACTA ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v Coughlin ,
Native American Issues ,
SCOTUS ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Tribal Corporations ,
Tribal Loans
On June 8, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, No. 22-148, holding that (1) when an accused trademark infringer uses another’s trademark to designate the source of its own...more
On June 8, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Health & Hospital Corp. of Marion Cty. v. Talevski, No. 21-806, holding that certain rights contained in the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act (FNHRA) can be enforced through a...more
On May 11, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Financial Oversight Board v. CPI, No. 22-96, holding that the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA) does not abrogate sovereign immunity of the...more
On April 18, 2023, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in a case of original jurisdiction, New York v. New Jersey, No. 156, Orig., holding the state of New Jersey could unilaterally withdraw from the...more
On April 19, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S., aka Halkbank v. United States, holding that the district court has jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3231 over the prosecution of Halkbank and that the...more
On March 21, 2023, the Supreme Court decided Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, No. 21-887, holding that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s (IDEA) exhaustion requirement, 20 U.S.C. § 1415(l), does not preclude an...more
On February 28, 2023, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Delaware v. Pennsylvania, No. 145, Orig., holding that certain instruments offered by MoneyGram are similar to money orders and are therefore covered...more
On February 22, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Bartenwerfer v. Buckley, No. 21-908, affirming the Ninth Circuit and holding that 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), which bars debtors from discharging any debt obtained by fraud,...more
On June 30, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Biden v. Texas, No. 21-954. The Court held that the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) does not prohibit the Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS)...more
On June 15, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas, No. 20-493, holding that Texas cannot prohibit a federally recognized Native American tribe from engaging in certain gambling activities under...more
On June 15, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided American Hospital Association, et al. v. Becerra, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al., No. 20-1114, holding that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)...more
On April 28, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C., No. 20-219, holding that damages for emotional distress are not recoverable in private actions brought to enforce the...more
On March 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Houston Community College System v. Wilson, No. 20-804, concluding that an elected official does not possess an actionable First Amendment retaliation claim arising purely...more
On January 13, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the application of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) emergency temporary standard mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for certain employees, holding that...more
On June 29, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., holding that the assignor of a patent is generally estopped from later challenging its validity, but that this estoppel does not apply...more
On June 28, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Lombardo v. St. Louis, 20-391, holding per curium that excessive force precedent requires courts to employ a “careful, context-specific analysis” on summary judgment.
In...more
On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided California v. Texas, holding that States and individuals challenging the Affordable Care Act lack standing to claim that the “individual mandate” is unconstitutional after...more
On June 7, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Sanchez v. Mayorkas, No. 20-315, holding that a foreign national with Temporary Protected Status was not entitled to an adjustment of status to make him a Lawful Permanent...more
On December 14, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Texas v. New Mexico, holding that New Mexico was entitled to delivery credit under the Pecos River Compact for water stored at the request of Texas that evaporated during...more
On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided McGirt v. Oklahoma, No. 18-9526, holding that the Creek Nation’s reservation in northeastern Oklahoma, which includes most of the city of Tulsa, has never been...more
7/13/2020
/ Criminal Convictions ,
Disestablishment ,
Federal Jurisdiction ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Fee Simple ,
Land Titles ,
Major Crimes Act ,
McGirt v Oklahoma ,
Native American Issues ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Treaties ,
Tribal Lands
On June 29, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Agency for International Development, et al. v. Alliance for Open Society International, Inc., et al., No. 19-177, holding that Congress may lawfully condition...more
7/1/2020
/ Constitutional Challenges ,
First Amendment ,
Foreign Affiliates ,
Foreign Aid ,
NGOs ,
Non-Citizens ,
Policies and Procedures ,
Prostitution ,
Public Health ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Sex Trafficking ,
The Leadership Act ,
United States Agency for International Development v Alliance for Open Society International Inc
On January 14, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander, No. 18-1165, remanding the case to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to decide whether to address the views of...more
1/15/2020
/ Appeals ,
Breach of Duty ,
Corporate Officers ,
Dismissals ,
Duty of Prudence ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Employee Stock Purchase Plans ,
ESOP ,
Failure To Disclose ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
FIfth Third Bancorp v Dudenhoeffer ,
Fraud ,
Inflated Projections ,
Insider Information ,
Misrepresentation ,
Plan Participants ,
Pleading Standards ,
Popular ,
Remand ,
Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v Jander ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Securities Violations ,
Vacated
On January 14, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC, No. 18-938, holding that an order unreservedly ruling on a creditor’s motion for relief from bankruptcy’s...more
1/15/2020
/ Appeals ,
Automatic Stay ,
Bankruptcy Court ,
Commercial Bankruptcy ,
Creditors ,
Debtors ,
Dismissals ,
Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure ,
Motion for Relief from Automatic Stay ,
Reaffirmation ,
Right To Appeal ,
Ritzen Group Inc v Jackson Masonry LLC ,
SCOTUS ,
Time-Barred Claims