Supreme Court of the United States Statute of Limitations

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

Health Headlines: Also in the News - July 2014

New ACO Rules Sent to OMB for Review – On June 26, 2014, a proposed Accountable Care Organization (ACO) rule that would make changes to the Medicare Shared Savings Program in advance of the second round of ACO contracts...more

Supreme Court Directs Tenth Circuit To Reconsider RMBS Ruling

On June 16, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a Tenth Circuit holding that RMBS claims filed by the NCUA were timely and instructed the circuit court to reconsider that holding in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in...more

Supreme Court Ruling Resolves Conflict on State Statutes of Repose

US Supreme Court rules CERCLA Section 309 does not preempt state statutes of repose. Federal causes of action remain unaffected. Last week, in a 7-2 decision, the US Supreme Court ruled in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger that...more

United States Supreme Court Holds that CERCLA Allows State Statutes of Repose to Limit Plaintiffs’ Injury Claims

This week, the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling of interest to any Potentially Responsible Party regarding the effect of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) on state...more

Statute of Repose: A New Weapon in Environmental Defense Counsel’s Arsenal

The June 9, 2014, Supreme Court ruling in CTS Corp v. Waldburger represents a victory for companies and landowners with legacy environmental liabilities in states with a statute of repose applicable to tort claims. Moreover,...more

Supreme Court Holds That CERCLA Preemption Is Inapplicable to Statutes of Repose

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), preempts statutes of limitations applicable to state-law tort actions for personal injury or property damage in certain...more

Supreme Court rules that statutes of repose may bar state tort claims under CERCLA

On June 9, 2014, the United States Supreme Court, in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, ruled that an individual state’s statute of repose is not preempted by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of...more

The “Discovery” Rule Is No Longer Supreme: The Supreme Court Holds That State Statutes of Repose Are Not Preempted by CERCLA

On June 9, 2014, the Supreme Court ruled in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger et al. that the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA, or the “Superfund” law), which preempts state statutes...more

Supreme Court Sends Strong Signal that Lower Courts Should Stop Interpreting CERCLA “in a liberal manner” and Focus on the...

The Supreme Court’s decision in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, No. 13-339, 573 U.S. __ (June 9, 2014), sends a strong message to lower courts that the oft-repeated refrain that CERCLA is a “remedial statute” that must be...more

Statutes of Repose Unaffected by CERCLA Requirement that State Law Incorporate Discovery Rule in Statutes of Limitation

On June 9, in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, et al., No. 13-339, the U.S. Supreme Court held 7-2, that the Fourth Circuit erred in holding that CERCLA Section 9658 applied to the application of the North Carolina statute of repose,...more

Do Statutes of Repose Under CERCLA Really Require Supreme Court Review

Even Superfund lawyers are likely to find the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in CTS Corporation v. Waldburger to be of limited interest. Unable to reach an agreement about a federal “toxic tort” cause of action, Congress...more

Breaking News: SCOTUS Rules Today CERCLA Does Not Preempt State Statutes of Repose

The United States Supreme Court today ruled that the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), enacted in 1980 to "promote the timely cleanup of hazardous waste sites," does not...more

Supreme Court Decides CTS Corp. v. Waldburger

On June 9, 2014, the United States Supreme Court decided CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, No. 13-339, holding that the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) does not preempt state...more

Supreme Court Gives a Primer on Laches in Intellectual Property Cases

In a recent copyright case revolving around the film Raging Bull, the Supreme Court held that the equitable doctrine of laches, which generally prevents claims where there was an unreasonable delay, does not bar a claim...more

Supreme Court Copyright Decision Determines When Laches Applies

On May 19, 2014, in a six-to-three decision written by Justice Ginsburg, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the doctrine of laches did not bar either legal or equitable relief in a copyright case that was brought within the...more

US Supreme Court Eliminates Laches Defense in Virtually All Copyright Infringement Claims

In Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, the US Supreme Court resolved a circuit split and ruled that the equitable defense of laches does not bar a plaintiff’s claim for damages brought within the Copyright Act’s three-year...more

Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc.

Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. - United States Supreme Court, May 19, 2014: Resolving circuit split concerning applicability of laches to copyright claims, U.S. Supreme Court reverses Ninth Circuit ruling that...more

Raging Bull Heiress Knocks Out MGM’s Laches Defense

In Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., Supreme Court holds that laches cannot bar claims for damages for copyright infringement brought during the 3-year limitations period. On May 19, 2014, in a case concerning the...more

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Laches Cannot Bar Damages Relief for Timely Filed Copyright Infringement Claims

The U.S. Supreme Court held Monday that the defense of laches cannot serve as an absolute bar to relief for actions brought within the Copyright Act’s three-year limitations period. The majority opinion, penned by Justice...more

Supreme Court Keeps Raging Bull Copyright Suit in the Ring

In a ruling that could potentially increase the number of copyright infringement actions, the Supreme Court of the United States has resolved a conflict among the circuits, holding that the equitable defense of laches cannot...more

U.S. Supreme Court Holds in Copyright Infringement Case that Laches Defense Cannot Alter Rolling Statute of Limitations for...

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday revived several copyright claims by the daughter of Frank Petrella, author of the screen play for the well-known film “Raging Bull.” In Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., the Court ruled...more

Supreme Court Finds Laches Does Not Bar Copyright Infringement Claim: Petrella v. Metro - Goldwyn - Mayer, Inc.

The doctrine of laches cannot be invoked as a bar to a plaintiff's claim for damages brought within the Copyright Act’s three-year statute of limitations period, according to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in...more

The Status of Patent Laches after Petrella v. MGM

Today in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. (case number 12-1315), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the doctrine of laches could not be invoked to bar a copyright claim that was brought within the statutorily allowed...more

Raging Bull Majority Decision: Supreme Court Nixes Laches As Defense To Copyright Damages

In Petrella v. MGM, the U.S. Supreme Court was confronted with the question of whether laches is available as a defense to copyright infringement. We have previously written about the case here and here. Yesterday, May 19,...more

Post-Heimeshoff Case Law Signifies Consistency in Applying ERISA Plan Limitations Provisions

As we reported back in December 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a reasonable limitation of actions provision in an employee welfare benefit plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974...more

92 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4