News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › U.S. Navy

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 -
DirectEmployers Association

OFCCP Week In Review: March 2022 #4

DirectEmployers Association on

The DE OFCCP Week in Review (WIR) is a simple, fast and direct summary of relevant happenings in the OFCCP regulatory environment, authored by experts John C. Fox, Candee Chambers and Jennifer Polcer. In today’s edition, they...more

Mintz

The Navy Is Polluting Another Pacific Island?

Mintz on

News this morning that fuel spills from a Navy depot on the Big Island of Hawaii are allegedly polluting the Island's water supply. This may sound familiar. Just last year, the United States Supreme Court told Guam that it...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Michigan Court Weighs In On Specific Personal Jurisdiction

Husch Blackwell LLP on

In Murphy v. Viad Corporation, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan recently considered the issue of specific personal jurisdiction in the context of asbestos claims under the standard set...more

Farrell Fritz, P.C.

US Supreme Court Rules that CERCLA-Specific Settlement is a Pre-Requisite to a CERCLA Contribution Claim

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

In May 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in Territory of Guam v. United States, 593 U.S. __ (2021), on the issue of whether a settlement resolving environmental liabilities was sufficient to establish a right of contribution for...more

Woods Rogers

Resolved, yet Unclear: Supreme Court Tightens CERCLA Contribution Claim Requirements

Woods Rogers on

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a party’s right to contribution claims under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) after entering into a settlement arises...more

Robinson & Cole LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Predicates to CERCLA Contribution Actions - Guam v. United States, No. 20-382 (May 24, 2021)

Robinson & Cole LLP on

In siding with the Territory of Guam in its dispute with the United States over costs to clean up the Ordot Landfill, the Supreme Court has resolved a circuit court split over which types of administrative settlements trigger...more

Stoel Rives LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Decision Revives Guam Suit, Clarifies CERCLA, and Provides Cautionary Tale

Stoel Rives LLP on

Does a consent decree under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) trigger a three-year limitation period to bring a contribution claim under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) when the...more

Holland & Hart LLP

SCOTUS Seeks to Clarify Contribution Claims under CERCLA

Holland & Hart LLP on

Last week, in its unanimous decision Guam v. United States, No. 20-382, the United States Supreme Court attempted to clarify a statutory question regarding the right to seek contribution that has been a source of uncertainty...more

Jackson Walker

Justices Hold CWA Settlement Does Not Start the Clock on CERCLA Limitations

Jackson Walker on

In Territory of Guam v. United States, the Supreme Court unanimously held that claims for contribution under Section 113(f)(3)(B) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) require...more

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

SCOTUS Clarifies Scope of CERCLA Contribution Claims

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Guam v. United States, clarifying when contribution actions under CERCLA may be brought. In a unanimous decision overturning the D.C. Circuit, the Court held that a...more

Morgan Lewis

US Supreme Court: Settlement of CERCLA-Specific Liability Needed to Give Rise to CERCLA Contribution Claim

Morgan Lewis on

Reversing the US Court of Appeals for DC Circuit, a unanimous US Supreme Court held that Guam’s settlement of Clean Water Act liabilities did not give rise to and trigger the statute of limitations to bring a Comprehensive...more

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real...

A Court-Side Seat: Guam’s CERCLA Claim Allowed, a “Roundup” Verdict Upheld, and Judicial Process Privilege Lost

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real... on

This is a brief account of some of the important environmental and administrative law cases recently decided. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT - BP PLC, et al. v Mayor and City of Baltimore The issue the court confronted was a...more

Cole Schotz

Supreme Court To DOJ: “No”

Cole Schotz on

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that a settlement of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”)-specific liability is required to give rise to a contribution action...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

CERCLA contribution reach and the Guam do-over

Bricker Graydon LLP on

On May 24, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court released its opinion in the Territory of Guam v. United States case. At issue was whether Guam could maintain a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Guam v. United States

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

On May 24, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Guam v. United States, holding that contribution under CERCLA does not arise until there is a CERCLA-specific liability, even if there is a settlement that resolves liability...more

Beveridge & Diamond PC

Supreme Court Clarifies That Only CERCLA Settlements Trigger Contribution Claims

Beveridge & Diamond PC on

On May 24, the Supreme Court weighed in on an issue that for decades has bedeviled litigants under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA): When can potentially responsible parties...more

Morgan Lewis - Up & Atom

Supreme Court Rings Eight Bells and Ends Navy Sailor Fukushima Suit

Morgan Lewis - Up & Atom on

The US Supreme Court rang eight bells on March 29, rejecting the petition by US Navy sailors to review last year’s Ninth Circuit decision upholding dismissal of their lawsuit in Cooper v. Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings...more

ArentFox Schiff

Investigations Newsletter: Investment Bank To Pay Over $130 Million To Resolve Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Fraud Allegations

ArentFox Schiff on

Deutsche Bank to Pay Over $130 Million to Resolve Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Fraud Allegations - Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft (Deutsche Bank) has agreed to pay more than $130 million to resolve the government’s...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

The Ex Post Facto Effect: The U.S. Supreme Court’s DeVries Decision And Asbestos Litigation In The United States

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Colleagues and clients frequently pose the question whether after more than forty years the asbestos litigation juggernaut has finally neared its inevitable conclusion. The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in...more

Blank Rome LLP

The Supreme Court Adopts a Middle of the Road Approach When Deciding a Manufacturer’s Duty to Warn in the Context of Maritime Tort...

Blank Rome LLP on

On March 19, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court in Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries held that, under maritime law, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn of asbestos or other hazardous parts when its own product, although...more

Beveridge & Diamond PC

Too Much to “Bare”: US Supreme Court Rejects Bare Metal Defense Under Federal Maritime Law

Beveridge & Diamond PC on

In an eagerly anticipated decision by the asbestos bar, the United States Supreme Court in Air & Liquid Systems et al. v. DeVries et at., Dkt. No. 17-1104, 2019 WL 1245520 (March 19, 2019) rejected the “bare metal defense” as...more

Polsinelli

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Asbestos Defendants “Bare Metal Defense” in Maritime Cases

Polsinelli on

In Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. et al. v. DeVries et al., No. 17-1104 (March 19, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court held that under federal maritime law, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when its product requires the...more

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real...

SCOTUS Limits “Bare Metal Defense”

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real... on

On March 19, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries, affirming the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in this maritime tort case involving the availability of...more

Cozen O'Connor

SCOTUS Rejects Bare Metal Defense in Maritime Products Liability Actions Involving Asbestos Exposure

Cozen O'Connor on

On March 19, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the first case involving maritime law in several years. In Air & Liquid Systems Corp. et al v. Devries, et al, 586 US ___ (2019), Justice Kavanaugh, writing for the majority...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - March 19, 2019

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions this morning: Washington State Dept. of Licensing v. Cougar Den, Inc., No. 16-1498: The State of Washington has a statute that taxes “motor vehicle fuel...more

36 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide