Supreme Court of the United States Jurisdiction

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
News & Analysis as of

Ninth Circuit Holds That "Tag Jurisdiction" Does Not Apply to Corporations - The Court's Decision Limits Personal Jurisdiction...

Following closely on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark personal jurisdiction decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has issued a decision that further reinforces the...more

Losing The Home-Team Advantage – The Supreme Court’s Narrowing of the Doctrine of General Personal Jurisdiction and its Impact on...

A recent Supreme Court opinion in a non-patent case, Daimler AG v. Bauman, likely will have a far-reaching impact on the prevalence of patent declaratory judgment actions. In the past, an accused patent infringer often could...more

CAFA: Recent Developments on the Jurisdictional and Settlement Fronts

Since Congress enacted the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) in 2005, the nation’s class action litigation has increasingly migrated to the federal stage, with plaintiffs bringing more class actions directly to federal court...more

Mind the Statutory Gap (aka A Jurisdictional Mess)

As we all know, on June 9 of this year, the Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Executive Benefits Ins. Agency vs. Arkison, 134 S. Ct. 2165, 189 L. Ed. 2d 83 (2014), which we had hoped would resolve the open...more

US Supreme Court’s Sleight of Hand in Bankruptcy Jurisdiction

With all attention focused on Executive Benefits, the Daimler decision could represent the real sea change in jurisdiction over non-core actions. Introduction - Recently, much of the bankruptcy bar was focused...more

Christmas in July: Will Bankruptcy Lawyers Find a Lump of Coal in Their Stockings?

As spring rolls into summer, bankruptcy practitioners await the Supreme Court’s decision in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkinson. With the Supreme Court’s term ending June 30, 2014, some wonder if the Court will,...more

Class Action Roundtable - July 2014

Executive Summary: MODERATOR: What are the implications of Daimler AG v. Bauman? How will the Court’s decision impact the ability to bring class actions against large, multi-site corporations? STEVEN ELLIS:...more

Did The Supreme Court Finally Explain Marathon And Stern? - Executive Benefits’ Impact on Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has spoken once again on the limited jurisdiction of the bankruptcy courts, adding to the understanding derived from Northern Pipeline Constr. Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co., 458 U.S. 50 (1982),...more

Supreme Court Allows Third Circuits GenOn Opinion to Stand: State Law Actions Not Preempted By the Clean Air Act

The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear the case of Kristie Bell v. GenOn, where the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Clean Air Act did not preempt state common law actions seeking damages for air pollution....more

U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Clarify Post-Judgment Remedies Against Foreign Sovereigns

On June 16, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions in Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd., one of the many cases to have arisen out of Argentina’s 2001 default on over $100 billion in sovereign bonds. While...more

Supreme Court Decides Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd.

On June 16, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) does not prevent a judgment creditor from conducting postjudgment discovery into a foreign sovereign's assets outside the...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction (Somewhat)

In 2011, the Supreme Court decided Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011), which gave voice to the Court’s grave concerns about the constitutional limits of bankruptcy court jurisdiction and raised several...more

Supreme Court Permits Bankruptcy Court to Hear Adversary Proceeding; Bypasses Issues Regarding Party Consent

On June 9, the Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy judge may submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for review by a federal district court in otherwise “core” adversary proceedings where a non-debtor party...more

Supreme Court Holds that the FSIA Does Not Limit Post-Judgment Discovery

In its latest decision interpreting the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), the Supreme Court made clear that any claim of immunity by a foreign state must rise or fall based on the text of the FSIA. Because the FSIA...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Stern v. Marshall

Not even Nostradamus could have predicted the profound effect that former Playmate Vickie Lynn Marshall (a/k/a Anna Nicole Smith) would have on the landscape of U.S. bankruptcy court jurisdiction. Nevertheless, two and a half...more

The corridor of uncertainty diminishes following another pro international arbitration judgment from the Indian Supreme Court

For international parties who have contracted with Indian counterparties and agreed to refer disputes to international arbitration, a critical issue is the degree to which the Indian courts have jurisdiction to review and set...more

The ‘‘Burden’’ of Patent Infringement: Supreme Court Holds That Burden of Proof Remains With Patentee Even in Declaratory Judgment...

The Supreme Court of the United States has made it clear that the traditional canons of litigation — including those involving jurisdiction and which party bears the burden of proof — hold true in patent cases, even those...more

Has Jurisdiction Been Taken for Granted

Will the US Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler A.G. v. Bauman affect where a plaintiff can sue a defendant for trademark infringement? In general, plaintiff’s prefer to sue defendants in their backyard. Specific jurisdiction...more

All or Nothing? The U.S. Supreme Court to Address Whether Evidence In Support of Removal Must Be Submitted with the Notice of...

On April 7, 2014, the United States Supreme Court granted the petition for writ of certiorari in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719 (“Dart Cherokee”), to address whether a defendant must include...more

Focus on Tax Controversy and Litigation - Supreme Court Decides Woods v. Commissioner, Holds for IRS on Jurisdictional and...

In this issue: - US Supreme Court Imposes Valuation-Misstatement Penalty in TEFRA Proceeding - Southern District of New York holds Cooperation with Government Waives Attorney-Client Privilege - IRS Issues...more

Stern Revisited, Testing the Jurisdictional Authority of the Bankruptcy Courts and Beyond

In January, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison. Executive Benefits is viewed by many as the sequel to Stern v. Marshall, 131 S. Ct. 2594, 180 L. Ed. 2d 475 (2011). In...more

Daimler and Walden: The Supreme Court's Continued Trend on Limiting Personal Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has issued two decisions that clarify the limitations of general and specific jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant. A defendant corporation will be subject to general jurisdiction in a state only if...more

Supreme Court clarifies competence-competence principle

In a highly anticipated decision, the US Supreme Court recently confirmed a $185 million award against Argentina in BG Group Plc v Republic of Argentina. The BG Group decision is significant for international arbitration...more

Supreme Court Holds That Arbitrators, Not Courts, Are To Interpret A Treaty’s Arbitration Prerequisite

The United States Supreme Court has held that arbitrators, not courts, bear the primary responsibility for interpreting and applying a local litigation requirement of an investment treaty between the United Kingdom and...more

Foreign Companies Dragged into U.S. Courts Get Reprieve as U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on General Jurisdiction

In Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U. S. ____ (Jan. 14, 2014), the U.S. Supreme Court reiterated that general or “all-purpose” jurisdiction can be exercised over foreign corporations only “when their affilia­tions with the State...more

100 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4