News & Analysis as of

Immunity State Agencies

Porter Hedges LLP

Texas Supreme Court Rules on Governmental Immunity in Construction Contract Dispute

Porter Hedges LLP on

Last week, the Texas Supreme Court issued an important case involving governmental immunity in construction contract disputes. The case, Pepper Lawson Horizon International Group LLC v. Texas Southern University, arose out of...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

South Carolina Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability Immunity Act Into Law

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster has signed the “South Carolina COVID-19 Liability Immunity Act” into law, providing legal immunity to certain businesses that reasonably adhere to public health guidance in effect at the...more

Troutman Pepper

Supreme Court of Wisconsin Holds That Private Subcontractor Is Immune to Property Damage Claims by Adjoining Landowners Because it...

Troutman Pepper on

Melchert v. Pro Elec. Contrs., 2017 Wis. Lexis 169 (April 7, 2017) - The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (“DOT”) contracted with Payne & Dolan (“P&D”) as General Contractor on a road improvement project. P&D in turn...more

King & Spalding

United States Supreme Court Rules that N.C. Dental Board Is Not Entitled to State Action Immunity from Antitrust Liability

King & Spalding on

In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. F.T.C., No. 13-534 (2015), the United States Supreme Court ruled last week that the North Carolina Dental Board, which is comprised mainly of practicing dentists, was not...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Limits Protectionism by State Healthcare Licensing Boards - Boards Comprised of Active Medical Providers Are Not...

Holland & Knight LLP on

The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in N.C. State Bd. of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 13-534, 2015 WL 773331 (S.Ct. February 25, 2015) makes clear that the anticompetitive actions of state...more

McGuireWoods LLP

Supreme Court Denies Antitrust Shield for NC Dental Board

McGuireWoods LLP on

On Wednesday, February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court released a 6-3 decision in North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, a case with potentially broad implications for regulation by dental and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court: State Agencies Controlled by Active Market Participants Must Have Active State Supervision to Qualify for Antitrust...

In a 6–3 decision issued February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States held in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission that if active market participants control an entity—even a...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That to Invoke Antitrust Immunity, State Agencies Controlled by Market Participants Must Prove Active...

On Feb. 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 6-3 decision that a state board with a controlling number of decision-makers who are active market participants in the occupation the board regulates does not enjoy state...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Strikes Down State Professional Boards’ Antitrust Immunity

Perkins Coie on

In a ruling with significant implications for state professional licensing boards and their members, on February 25, 2015, the United States Supreme Court found that practitioner-controlled state boards do not have inherent...more

9 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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