Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Universal Injunctions, Associational Standing, and Forum Shopping - Their Effects on Legal Challenges to Regulations
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Eleventh Circuit Grants en banc Review to Resolve Controversial TCPA Standing Ruling
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 313: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 110: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
Let's Talk Child Custody
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Supreme Court’s Rulings On Same-Sex Marriage Spark Many Questions On Employee Benefits
DynCorp's 'Strategic' Defense In Drug Crop Spraying Suit
Bill on Bankruptcy: MF Global Creditors Undeterred by Low Value
Same-Sex Marriage Cases in 90 Seconds
In a case that has been closely watched by the charitable sector, on June 3, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit issued a decision blocking a race-based grant program that provided funds and mentorship to...more
Late last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held in Regions Bank v. Legal Outsource PA, No. 17-11736, 2019 WL 4051703 (11th Cir. Aug 28, 2019), that a loan guarantor does not qualify as an “applicant”...more
Timely Topics - The final rule implementing Section 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) on May...more
The federal Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) outlaws discrimination in lending based not only on race, color and national origin, but also religion, sex, disability and familial status. Across the country, courts are grappling with...more
On April 21, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit handed down its opinion in Cooper v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, No. 14-51343. It provides further guidance, at least within the Fifth Circuit, on the...more
On January 20, a Florida appellate court held that a personal representative can initiate a Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA) complaint alleging discrimination on behalf of the deceased former employee. In Cimino v. American...more
This is the second article of a three-part series about two recent decisions by federal courts in Connecticut and California: Viens v. America Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co., No. 3:14cv952 (D. Conn. June 23, 2015), and Jones...more
Recently, a Federal court in Northern California denied Uber Technologies, Inc.’s request to dismiss an access lawsuit. The plaintiffs, National Federation of the Blind of California (“NFBC”) and individual blind members with...more
The New York City Human Rights Law specifically says that an employer’s agent can be held liable for discrimination, but its liability provision doesn’t address the circumstances under which that agent may be held liable for...more
While you’d be hard pressed to find a California lawyer who doesn’t know that discrimination against business patron is unlawful, many are not familiar with the California law barring such discrimination – the Unruh Act....more
On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decisions in two same-sex marriage cases. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, No. 12-144, the Court ruled that the proponents of a popular voter initiative that reversed...more
For Canadians, yesterday’s landmark same-sex decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court probably seems ho-hum. In Ontario, it’s been over 10 years since the Court of Appeal held that the legal definition marriage cannot exclude...more
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 vote that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. The decision in United States v. Windsor means that same-sex couples who are married under state law...more
Windsor v. United States - Issue: Can the federal government define marriage? Holding: No. Loser: The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was passed in 1996 and signed by President Clinton, was...more
Sidestepping a highly divisive issue, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled yesterday that it lacked authority to decide on the merits whether an initiative passed by California voters limiting marriage to opposite gender couples...more
As the 2012 term of the U. S. Supreme Court comes to a close, the Justices left the most politically and emotionally charged decisions for last. On June 26, 2013, the Court handed down its decision striking down the federal...more
This morning, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its highly anticipated decision in United States v. Windsor, ruling that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional on equal protection grounds. With...more
SCOTUS holds that Article III’s requirement that a party invoking the jurisdiction of a federal court seek relief for a personal, particularized injury serves vital interests going to the role of the Judiciary in the federal...more