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

Appellate Practice Roundup - February 2015

Over the past few months, a number of important appellate procedure opinions have issued in federal and California appellate courts regarding posttrial motions, appealability, and appellate jurisdiction under various...more

Stern with a Twist: Supreme Court to Consider Constitutional Authority of Bankruptcy Courts

The Supreme Court has an opportunity to clarify the constitutionality of the allocation of power between federal district courts and bankruptcy courts....more

High Court Finds Plausible Showing of Amount in Controversy Sufficient to Remove Action

In a decision that may make it somewhat easier for defendants to remove putative class actions from state to federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that defendants in such cases do not need to offer evidence in their...more

Are you defending suits where you don’t belong?

The United States Supreme Court turned conventional wisdom on its head about the reach of personal jurisdiction 12 months ago in its unanimous opinion in Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014). Personal jurisdiction...more

Supreme Court Holds Trademark Tacking is a Question, like any Inquiry from the Perspective of an Ordinary Purchaser or Consumer,...

Background: In a priority contest between trademark owners, the owner of a mark is entitled to “tack on” earlier use of a similar mark provided that the two marks are sufficiently similar. Some circuits treated the question...more

High Court Reaffirms Local Government's Authority in Denials of Applications for Cell Towers

Decision Clarifies that Local Government’s Decision Need Not State Reasons if they are Contemporaneously Published Elsewhere - A local government need not state the reasons for its denial of a new cell-tower...more

U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Same-Sex Marriage Laws

It was announced today that the U.S. Supreme Court will consider two important questions relating to same-sex marriage–whether states are required to allow same-sex marriages within their jurisdictions, and whether states are...more

Supreme Court Update: Jennings V. Stephens And Order List

Greetings, Court fans! We're back with breaking news on the certiorari front, along with a summary of one of Wednesday's decisions, Jennings v. Stephens (13-7211), on the application of certain longstanding principles of...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Removal Pleading Standard

The US Supreme Court recently held that under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a defendant need not provide proof of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal to federal court. Only a plausible allegation is...more

Eleventh Circuit Affirms CAFA-Based Remand Order

Just two weeks after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a CAFA-based remand order where the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the...more

Preemption and Primary Jurisdiction After Pom Wonderful

After the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Pom Wonderful LLC v. The Coca-Cola Co., __ U.S. __, 134 S.Ct. 2228 (2014), fear arose among national marketers that the decision would produce a wave of class actions challenging food,...more

Third Circuit Weighs In On Burden of Proof and Evidentiary Standards Applicable to Cases Removed Under CAFA

Days before the Supreme Court’s decision addressing the requirements for CAFA notices of removal in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Third Circuit addressed the evidentiary requirements for surviving a...more

Supreme Court Establishes New Standards: Removal Pleadings Now Less Burdensome For State Court Suits

Last week, the United States Supreme Court held that a notice of removal from state court to federal court requires only pleading good faith allegations that the amount in controversy exceeds a jurisdictional threshold. The...more

Who Needs Proof? Not The Notice of Removal.

In a previous blog, we explained that the Supreme Court was considering whether a defendant merely has to allege jurisdictional facts or provide evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case....more

Supreme Court Clarifies the Standard Governing Removal of Class Action Cases to Federal Court

The US Supreme Court ruled last Monday that class action defendants need not provide evidentiary submissions in support of their attempts to remove a case from state to federal court. Rather, they need only include in their...more

Supreme Court Update: Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. V. Owens (13-719) And Heien V. North Carolina (13-604)

Greetings, Court fans Long before he became Chief, John Roberts quipped that "[o]nly Supreme Court justices and schoolchildren are expected to and do take the entire summer off." Right now, the Justices are in the midst...more

Removing a Barrier: The Supreme Court Holds That, Under CAFA, Notices of Removal Need Not Include Evidence Supporting the Amount...

On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens that a class action defendant need only allege the requisite amount of controversy “plausibly” in the notice of...more

No Proof Necessary: SCOTUS Rules Defendant’s Notice Of Removal Under CAFA Need Not Include Evidence of The Amount In Controversy

On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split in holding that a defendant need not supply evidence of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act...more

Supreme Court: Evidence of Amount in Controversy Not Required at Removal

Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant removing a putative class action from state to federal court pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) need not submit evidence to...more

Supreme Court Confirms That A Notice Of Removal Requires Only A “Plausible Allegation” That The Amount In Controversy Has Been Met

The Supreme Court has held that a notice of removal requires only a “plausible allegation that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold,” and confirmed that a notice of removal need not include evidence...more

The United States Supreme Court Holds That a Defendant’s Notice of Removal Need Only Include a “Plausible Allegation” That the...

On December 15, 2014, the US Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC, et al. v. Owens.1 Writing for the 5 – 4 majority, Justice Ginsberg held that a defendant’s notice of removal pursuant to...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Fairness Act’s Removal Requirement: 'Liberal Rules' Do Not Require Evidence of Amount in...

Class action defendants need not include evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), thanks to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in...more

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Removing Class Actions to Federal Court

Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, No. 13-719, a case involving the procedural requirements for removing a class action from state to federal court under the Class...more

U.S. Supreme Court Eases CAFA Removals

Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) in 2005, in response to perceived (in fact real) concerns regarding potential abuses of the class action process. Among CAFA’s important provisions was the right to remove...more

Supreme Court Opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719. Unsurprisingly, the Court held that a notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act does not need to...more

126 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 6