Midyear Banking Review
If I won my case, why do I need to worry about an appeal?
As discussed in our recent article, the Virginia General Assembly voted to allow most criminal defendants and civil litigants to have an appeal as of right to the Court of Appeals of Virginia starting on January 1, 2022. ...more
As a follow up to a previous post the Minnesota Supreme Court issued its decision on April 21, 2021, reversing the Minnesota Court of Appeals and remanding the matter for further review. In so doing, the Court concluded that...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: A recent 10th Circuit decision holding that in order for the abuse of discretion standard to apply in litigation the claims administrator must provide participants with actual notice of discretionary...more
In recent Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) litigation challenging benefit decisions by plan administrators and fiduciaries, litigants have been pleading closely related claims under multiple ERISA...more
On December 23, 2019, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a decision by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) approving affiliated-interest agreements permitting Minnesota Power and its...more
Jones Day filed an amicus brief in the Illinois Supreme Court on behalf of the Taxpayers' Federation of Illinois regarding the standard of review for Illinois Tax Tribunal decisions. On behalf of the Taxpayers' Federation...more
On July 15, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit touched on the new regulations governing what constitutes a “full and fair review” of a claim for benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act....more
The Tenth Circuit upheld a claims administrator’s decision denying a claim for residential mental health treatment as not medically necessary...more
Judicial deference to state tax agencies puts taxpayers at a steep disadvantage and wastes time and resources on costly tax disputes. A united advocacy effort can help promote passage of state-level legislation that takes the...more
It is said that the first rule of a successful appeal is to win in the trial court. But, regardless of winning or losing in the trial court, one of the most important considerations in evaluating exposure and the likelihood...more
CEQA Case Report: Understanding the Judicial Landscape for Development - In a published opinion issued December 24, 2018, Sierra Club v. County of Fresno, Case No. S219783, the California Supreme Court determined that an...more
Last week the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a proposed set of new regulations to further define and update the De Novo review process. Although De Novo review has been available for two decades, for the past 20...more
Until recently, there had been confusion regarding the application of Florida’s Medical Malpractice Act (the “Act”) as it pertains to (1) the proper appellate standard of review of a presuit expert’s qualifications, and (2)...more
To reduce the cost of maintaining an ERISA plan and reduce the expense of ERISA litigation, it is helpful to have courts both apply a deferential standard of review and limit the review to the administrative record. If an...more
In U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision on standards of appellate review, holding that appellate courts should review a bankruptcy court’s determination of whether a...more
Most attorneys know that failing to contemporaneously object to an adverse ruling can subject the issue to a more stringent standard of review on appeal. For example, failing to object below to a ruling of law means that,...more
This is the third installment of our year-in-review series covering major developments at FDA. While the previous two installments, pertain to FDA actions on drugs and biologics, this post will address developments related...more
In Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach, et al., the Supreme Court of California held that lead agencies need to expressly disclose and consider the jurisdictional claims and regulatory opinions of responsible...more
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court confirmed that federal appeals courts should apply a deferential standard of review to federal district court determinations regarding the legal sufficiency of EEOC subpoenas....more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision on April 3, 2017, in McLane Co., Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a case which presented the question of what the appropriate standard of appellate...more
In a 7 to 1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that courts of appeals should largely defer to lower courts’ decisions when policing subpoenas issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). By...more
On April 3, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in McLane Co. v. EEOC, addressing how federal courts review subpoenas that the EEOC issues while investigating charges of employment discrimination. McLane involved...more
On April 3. 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court decided McLane Co., Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, holding that a district court’s decision whether to enforce or quash an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission...more
Just how broad is the EEOC’s subpoena power and are we likely to get some guidance soon? We’ve said before that the McLane v. EEOC case (which is about the EEOC’s subpoena power and is currently before the Supreme Court) is...more
“Enough already!” Reading between the lines, this is what a seemingly exasperated California Supreme Court appears to be saying in its latest California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) decision?Friends of the College of...more