Latest Publications

Share:

Supreme Court Decides Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid

On April 1, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, holding that to qualify as an “automatic telephone dialing system” (commonly referred to as an “autodialier”) under Section 227(a)(1)(A) of the...more

Supreme Court Decides Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP

On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715, holding that in assessing whether a congressional subpoena directed at personal information of the president is “related to, and in...more

Supreme Court Decides Trump v. Vance

On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Vance, No. 19-635, holding that President Donald Trump was required to respond to a state subpoena of his tax returns and other financial information because “Article...more

Supreme Court Decides Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru

On July 8, 2020, the United States Supreme Court decided Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, No. 19-267, holding that the First Amendment’s “ministerial exception,” under the religion clauses, bars courts from...more

Supreme Court Decides Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants

On July 6, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, No. 19-631, holding that the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (TCPA) exception for calls made for the sole purpose of...more

Supreme Court Decides Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

On June 29, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, holding that the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) must be removable at will by the...more

Supreme Court Decides United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. v. Booking.com B. V.

On June 30, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States decided United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. v. Booking.com B. V., No. 19-46, holding that a generic term, like “Booking,” combined with “.com” does not...more

Supreme Court Decides Rotkiske v. Klemm, et al.

On December 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Rotkiske v. Klemm, et al., No. 18-328, holding that the one-year statute of limitations set out in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) begins to...more

Supreme Court Decides Iancu v. Brunetti

On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided Iancu v. Brunetti, No. 18-302, holding that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering federal trademarks that are “immoral” or “scandalous” violates the First...more

Supreme Court Decides Flowers v. Mississippi

On June 21, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided Flowers v. Mississippi, No. 17-9572, holding that the state court committed clear error in concluding that the state’s peremptory strike of a black prospective juror...more

Supreme Court Decides PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc.

On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., No. 17-1705, holding that whether the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2006 order interpreting the...more

Supreme Court Decides National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra

On June 26, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, No. 16-1140, holding that the petitioners were likely to succeed on their claim that California’s...more

Supreme Court Decides Ohio v. American Express

On June 25, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided Ohio v. American Express, No. 16-1454, holding that American Express’s antisteering rules, which prevent merchants from discouraging customers’ use of Amex cards to...more

Supreme Court Decides Carpenter v. U.S.

On June 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided Carpenter v. U.S., No. 16-402, holding that law enforcement, absent exigent circumstances, must get a warrant to obtain cell-site location information (CSLI) that...more

Supreme Court Decides South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc.

On June 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., No. 17-494, holding that states can require out-of-state sellers to collect and remit sales tax on goods shipped to the state, even if...more

Supreme Court Decides California Public Employees' Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc., No. 16-373

On June 26, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc., No. 16-373, holding that the three-year statute of repose in the Securities Act of 1933 cannot...more

Supreme Court Decides Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214.

On June 23, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, holding that, in determining whether a regulatory taking has occurred under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, courts should...more

Supreme Court Decides Ziglar v. Abbasi, No. 15-1358.

On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Ziglar v. Abbasi, No. 15-1358, which was consolidated with Ashcroft v. Abbasi, No. 15-1359 and Hasty v. Abbasi, No. 15-1363, holding that detention-policy claims...more

Supreme Court Decides Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194.

On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194, holding that a North Carolina statute that bars registered sex offenders from accessing social networking websites that...more

Supreme Court Decides Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins

On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339, vacating the decision of the Ninth Circuit and remanding to the Ninth Circuit to consider the “concrete-injury” requirement...more

Supreme Court Decides Evenwel v. Abbott

On April 4, 2016, the United States Supreme Court decided Evenwel v. Abbott, No. 14-940, holding that a state may draw legislative districts based on total population. In 2013, Texas adopted a new map for state Senate...more

Sprint Agrees to Pay FTC $2.95M Penalty to Settle FCRA Allegations

On October 21, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission announced an agreement with Sprint to resolve allegations that Sprint violated disclosure requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Sprint will pay $2.95 million...more

Supreme Court Decides Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association

On March 9, 2015, the United States Supreme Court decided Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, No. 13-1041, holding that a federal administrative agency does not need to use the Administrative Procedure Act’s (APA)...more

Ninth Circuit Weighs in on When Franchisors May Be Liable for Franchisees' Unlawful Text Messaging Campaigns

In Thomas v. Taco Bell Corp.,[3] a franchisee association planned a promotion in which text messages were sent to 17,000 people in the Chicago area to promote a local sweepstakes contest. The lower court dismissed the case...more

Supreme Court Decides Lane v. Franks

On June 19, 2014, the United States Supreme Court decided Lane v. Franks, No. 13-483, holding that a public employee's sworn testimony is entitled to First Amendment protection when it is given outside the scope of ordinary...more

27 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide