State Laws on Screening and Federal Preemption – Where Are We Now and Where Are We Heading? — FCRA Focus Podcast
#WorkforceWednesday: Preparing for Biden's Vaccine Mandate, Mandate Pushback Begins, NLRA's Reach Expected to Expand - Employment Law This Week®
Williams Mullen Manufacturing Edge Video Series - Episode 1
Revisiting McGirt: New Legal Developments Challenge Oklahoma’s Landmark Ruling
Edible Bites Episode 8: Impact of Cannabis Legalization on Government Contractors
The Immediate and Lasting Impacts of McGirt: A Novel Ruling for Oklahoma
Podcast: Federal and State Cannabis Rules Are Moving in Different Directions - Diagnosing Health Care
Part 1 of 2: The Impact of Marijuana for Employers
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a district court’s refusal to enjoin arbitration was immediately appealable because the arbitration agreement was governed by state law rather than the Federal...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit revived a hotel group’s federal trade secret suit against two former employees, finding that the district court did not have enough information to conclude that the hotel group...more
On Wednesday, a U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit panel applied the U.S. Constitution’s Dormant Commerce Clause (DCC) to the medical cannabis industry in a 2-1 decision, striking down local laws requiring state...more
In a breakthrough final rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission carves out space in wholesale markets for the aggregation of distributed energy resources. Earlier in the summer, the US Court of Appeals for the DC...more
While much of the world came to a halt in response to the coronavirus pandemic, the California Courts of Appeal were busy issuing important decisions on the enforceability of arbitration clauses. As the economy starts to...more
In its recent decision in Rodriguez v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., No. 18–1269 (Sup. Ct. Feb. 25, 2020), the Supreme Court held that federal courts may not apply the federal common law “Bob Richards Rule” to determine...more
On February 25, 2020, the United States Supreme Court in Rodriguez v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation struck down a judicial federal common law rule—known as the Bob Richards rule—that is used by courts to allocate tax...more
On February 25, 2020, in Rodriguez v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, No. 18-1269 (U.S. 2020), the U.S. Supreme Court effectively ruled that the so-called “Bob Richards rule” should not be used to determine which...more
On February 25, 2020, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion vacating a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit applying federal common law to determine the allocation of a corporate...more
The United States Supreme Court has picked up the pace this week, already issuing eight regular opinions and four opinions relating to orders as of today. We discuss the tax-related items here. In Rodriguez v. FDIC, the...more
On February 25, 2020, the Supreme Court decided Rodriguez v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, No. 18-1269, overruling a federal common law rule that was used in some circumstances to determine how to distribute the tax...more
When can a Federal Court employ a federal common law rule to make its decision in the case? Justice Gorsuch answer this in Rodriguez v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., U.S., No. 18-1269, 2/25/20. The answer...less often than you...more
Adding another chapter to the legal controversies that continue to rage over the siting of new gas pipelines, on September 10, 2019 the Third Circuit upheld the State of New Jersey’s sovereign immunity objection to the...more
November 22, 2019, San Antonio Judge Peter Sakai granted a temporary injunction preventing the City’s Sick and Safe Leave Ordinance from taking effect. The Ordinance’s December 1, 2019, effective date has been indefinitely...more
Add the Fifth Circuit to the growing list of Federal Circuit Courts that have decided that “class arbitrability” is a gateway question for a court, rather than an arbitrator, to decide in the first instance, absent the...more
On June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled that state wage and hour laws do not apply to offshore drilling workers where federal law addresses the relevant issue. In Parker Drilling Management...more
In a rare decision applying the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. §1331 et seq.(“OCSLA”), the United States Supreme Court has clarified, re-affirmed and perhaps (given the breadth of its opinion) expanded the...more
U.S. Supreme Court reaffirms primacy of federal law on Outer Continental Shelf holding state law may not be adopted where federal law already addresses the issue. In Parker Drilling Management Services Ltd. v. Newton, 587...more
Workers on oil drilling platforms off the coast of California are covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), not California’s overtime and wage laws, the U.S. Supreme Court has held unanimously. Parker Drilling...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued two 5-4 decisions in as many months regarding class procedures. Lamp Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 587 U. S. ____ (2019) was favorable to corporate defendants by limiting the availability of class...more
On June 10, 2019, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that state wage and hour laws do not apply to certain drilling rig employees working off the California coast. The rig workers argued that California law...more
By a unanimous 9-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday declined to extend California’s wage-and-hour laws to employees working on offshore drilling platforms subject to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (Parker...more
On June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Parker Drilling Management Services, Ltd. v. Newton, No. 18-389, holding that state law does not apply to the Outer Continental Shelf when federal law addresses...more
In In re Muhs, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit was called upon to decide whether “the meaning of ‘willful and malicious’ under Alaska law is identical to the meaning of ‘willful and malicious’ under...more
On April 24, 2019, in a 5-4 decision split along ideological lines, the Supreme Court held in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela that class arbitration is not available where arbitration agreements are unclear about whether the...more