Statute of Limitations Supreme Court of the United States

Statute of Limitations refers to a statute that sets the time period during which a legal claim can be brought. Most statute of limitations laws require individuals to sue at some point during a set period... more +
Statute of Limitations refers to a statute that sets the time period during which a legal claim can be brought. Most statute of limitations laws require individuals to sue at some point during a set period usually commencing from the date of the wrong or injury or the discovery of the wrong or injury. Except for under a limited set of circumstances, if an individual does not file a suit within the specified time period, the law bars them from ever suing on that claim. less -
News & Analysis as of

Healthcare Legal News: Volume 5, Number 3

RESPONDING TO SUBPOENAS AND OTHER REQUESTS FOR PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION: TAKE THEM AT FACE VALUE - Healthcare providers and other HIPAA covered entities receive requests for protected health information (“PHI”) from...more

FDCPA Bona Fide Error Defense Held Applicable to Statute-of-Limitation Mistakes of Law

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich LPA, 559 U.S. 573 (2010), it is clear that the bona fide error defense set forth in section 1692k(c) of the Fair Debt Collection...more

Highway Funding Bill Includes Significant Changes to Tax Rules

Unexpected changes in FBAR, corporate and partnership returns, and statute of limitations and mortgage reporting tax rules are embedded in funding bill H.R. 3236. When US President Barack Obama extended funding for...more

Employee Benefits Developments - July 2015

Second Circuit Holds That Posthumous QDROs Are Valid. Yale-New Haven Hospital brought an action in federal court to resolve competing claims by a former spouse of a deceased participant and the deceased participant’s...more

Supreme Court Rejects Application of Wartime Tolling to Civil False Claims Actions

The cost and risk associated with allegations under the FCA create a heightened importance on defining the scope of the claims that are at issue. Accordingly, the applicable statute of limitations is critical in determining...more

California Employment Law Notes - July 2015

Employee's Inability To Work For A Particular Supervisor Does Not Constitute A "Disability" - Higgins-Williams v. Sutter Med. Found., 237 Cal. App. 4th 78 (2015) - Michaelin Higgins-Williams worked as a clinical...more

United State Supreme Court Confirms ERISA Fiduciary’s Continuing Duty To Monitor Investments

In its Tibble v. Edison International decision the United State Supreme Court confirmed that the scope of an ERISA fiduciary’s duty of prudence continues after initial investments are made and imposes an ongoing duty to...more

The Sixth Circuit Expands American Pipe Tolling

On July 7, the Sixth Circuit decided Phipps v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 13-6194, 2015 WL 4079441 (6th Cir. July 7, 2015), an interlocutory appeal in one of the regional progeny of the U.S. Supreme Court’s famous decision in...more

Another Mini-Dukes Action Revived

Current and former women employees of Wal-Mart recently won big in the Sixth Circuit in their mini-Dukes discrimination class action. The trial court had ruled that the class action was filed too late, but the court of appeal...more

U.S. Supreme Court Says “Regular Review” of ERISA Investments Required

ERISA plan fiduciaries charged with responsibility for selecting, monitoring or removing plan investment options should pay close attention to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Tibble v. Edison Intl., 135 S. Ct. 1823...more

The ERISA Litigation Newsletter - June 2015

Editor's Overview - In this month's newsletter, Anthony Cacace analyzes the heavily anticipated Supreme Court ruling in Tibble v. Edison Intl., 135 S. Ct. 1823 (2015), where the Court held that ERISA's fiduciary duty of...more

Supreme Court Vacates Decision Applying Statute of Limitations in Excessive Fee Case

In a highly anticipated decision concerning 401(k) excessive fee litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in Tibble v. Edison, Int’l, No. 13-550, vacating the lower court’s decision that had found...more

Health Care E-Note - June 2015

In This Issue: - Why, Again, Do You Think That Worker is an Independent Contractor? - I-9 and E-Verify Compliance Practices for Temporary Labor and Contractors - Excerpt From Why, Again, Do You Think That...more

SCOTUS Reinforces ERISA Fiduciaries' Continuing Duty To Monitor Plan Investments

Recently, in Tibble v Edison International, 575 U.S.(2015), the United States Supreme Court addressed the application of the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) statute of limitations for violations of fiduciary...more

Supreme Court Expands the Potential for Challenges of ERISA Fiduciaries and Their Ongoing Duty to Monitor Investment Options

The Supreme Court recently affirmed that retirement plan fiduciaries have an ongoing duty under ERISA to monitor investment options and the fees charged by them. This means that ERISA plan fiduciaries can be held liable if...more

Once Again, the Supreme Court Upsets Precedent in Fourth and Eleventh Circuit

As we reported in our March 11, 2014 article, the Eleventh and Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals definitively rejected the “continuing breach” theory in recent disputes involving statute of limitations deadlines in ERISA cases...more

Advisors Advantage - June 2015

In This Issue: - For Retirement Plan Providers, It's All About Making A Connection - DOL Comment Period Extended - Supreme Trouble with Tibbles - My Referrals Aren't For Sale And Neither Should...more

Supreme Court Reminds Companies to Monitor 401(k) Plan Investments, Sets Parameters for "Regular Review" Requirements

Companies and in-house fiduciaries face increasing scrutiny these days over their 401(k) and other retirement plans. This was underscored again recently by a key Supreme Court ruling. In Tibble v. Edison International, the...more

Supreme Court Decision in Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter

Last Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. (KBR) v. United States ex rel. Carter, resolving two questions that had previously divided lower courts interpreting the federal...more

What Does the Supreme Court’s Tibble Ruling Mean for Practitioners and ERISA Fiduciaries?

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Tibble v. Edison Int’l, et al., --- S.Ct. ---, Case No. 13-550, 2015 WL 2340845 (May 18, 2015), is perhaps more interesting for what the Court did not decide than for what it did....more

Supreme Court Decides Qui Tam First-to-File Issues

Whether you are on the defense side or the relator side of the qui tam world, you can count the Supreme Court’s opinion in Kellogg, Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States ex. Rel. Carter as a win and a loss. Since...more

Supreme Court Says Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act Does Not Toll the False Claims Act's Statute of Limitations

In a unanimous Supreme Court decision issued May 26, 2015, Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter (KBR), Case No. 12-1497, the United States Supreme Court addressed two significant False Claims...more

KBR v. Carter–Supreme Court Holds that the First-to-File Bar Only Applies to Pending Cases

On Wednesday the Supreme Court, in Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter, No. 12-1497 (2015), held that the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (“WSLA”) only tolls the statute of limitations...more

Supreme Court Update: Wellness International Network, Ltd. V. Shariff (13-935); Commil USA, LLC V. Cisco Systems, Inc. (13-896)...

This past week the Court released important decisions in the areas of bankruptcy law (Wellness International Network, Ltd v. Shariff (13-935), patent law (Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (13-896), and the False Claims...more

Supreme Court: Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act does not apply to civil claims; ruling may also mean more criminal...

Last week, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Kellogg, Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. U.S. ex rel. Carter. This case concerned the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA), a statute that suspends the statute...more

174 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 7

"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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×