On June 8, 2020, the Supreme Court decided Lomax v. Ortiz-Marquez, No. 18-8369, holding that the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA) prevents a prisoner who has had at least three lawsuits dismissed because they were...more
6/10/2020
/ Appeals ,
Dismissal With Prejudice ,
Dismissals ,
Failure To State A Claim ,
FRCP 41 ,
Frivolous Lawsuits ,
In Forma Pauperis ,
Lomax v Ortiz-Marquez ,
PLRA ,
Prison Litigation Reform Act ,
Prisoners ,
Reaffirmation ,
SCOTUS
On June 17, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill, No. 18-281, holding that the Virginia House of Delegates and its speaker lacked standing to appeal an order...more
6/18/2019
/ Appeals ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Dismissals ,
Equal Protection ,
Fourteenth Amendment ,
Gerrymandering ,
House of Delegates ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Intervenors ,
Racial Gerrymandering ,
Redistricting ,
SCOTUS ,
Standing ,
State Attorneys General ,
State Legislatures ,
Virginia House of Delegates v Bethune-Hill
On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Apple Inc. v. Pepper, No. 17-204, holding that iPhone owners who purchase apps from Apple’s App Store are “direct purchasers” from Apple and may sue Apple for alleged monopolization...more
5/14/2019
/ Antitrust Violations ,
Appeals ,
Apple Inc v Pepper ,
Class Action ,
Direct Purchasers ,
Dismissals ,
Internet Retailers ,
iPhone ,
Mobile Apps ,
Monopolization ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS
On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Cochise Consultancy, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Hunt, No. 18-315, holding that the limitations period in 31 U.S.C. § 3731(b)(2) applies to False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuits in which...more
5/14/2019
/ Appeals ,
Cause of Action Accrual ,
Cochise Consultancy Inc v United States ex rel Hunt ,
Dismissals ,
False Claims Act (FCA) ,
Intervenors ,
Limitation Periods ,
Qui Tam ,
Reaffirmation ,
Relators ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Statute of Limitations
On March 20, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus LLP, No. 17-1307, holding that a business engaged in only nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings is not a “debt collector” for all purposes under the...more