In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Episode 18 | Unpacking the Packing: A Perspective on the Efforts to Expand the Supreme Court
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#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
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Polsinelli Podcasts - Supreme Court Closes Gap on Bankruptcy Issue
A few months ago, we wrote about the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to grant review in Labcorp v. Davis. As we noted at the time, Labcorp raises a long-debated question of class-action law: Can a federal court certify a...more
On April 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, d/b/a Labcorp v. Davis et al., No. 24-304 (2025 Term) to determine whether certification is appropriate in a class...more
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) heard oral argument this week in Labcorp v. Davis (No. 24-304) to determine “[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure...more
On April 29, 2025, the Supreme Court heard argument on an issue that has divided the circuits: “Whether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) when some members of the...more
On January 24, 2024, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Laboratory Corp. of America v. Davis (“LabCorp”),[1] to consider “[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure...more
On January 24, 2025, the United States Supreme Court agreed to answer a question that has divided the circuits: Can a federal court certify a class containing members who lack any Article III injury? In Davis v. Laboratory...more
The scope of Bankruptcy Court jurisdiction has been the subject of numerous decisions, including multiple decisions by the United States Supreme Court since Bankruptcy Courts were created by the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978....more
The FTC, and antitrust enforcement in general, are having their moment. For example, in early January the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in AMG Capital Management v. Federal Trade Commission, a case questioning the FTC’s...more
The U.S. Supreme Court entered an order last Friday that divides and enlarges the time for oral argument in Seila Law, which is scheduled for March 3. ...more
This past Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it has agreed to decide whether the CFPB’s single-director-removable-only-for-cause structure is constitutional. The Court granted Seila Law’s petition for a writ of...more
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Spokeo v. Robins, which held that federal plaintiffs alleging a statutory violation must have suffered a real, concrete injury in order to have Article III standing, many defendants...more
The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision last Tuesday affirmed the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Patchak v. Zinke, holding that Congress through the Gun Lake Act, which reaffirms...more
On February 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Patchak v. Zinke, No. 16-498. No opinion commanded a majority of the Court, but six justices concluded that the plaintiff’s lawsuit under the Indian...more
On June 12, 2017, the United States Supreme Court, in an opinion authored by Justice Ginsburg, held that “[f]ederal courts of appeals lack jurisdiction under [28 U.S.C.] § 1291 to review an order denying class certification...more
On June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker. Baker resolves a Circuit split concerning whether a plaintiff, after losing a class certification battle, can effectively manufacture...more
The Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Justice Ginsburg, has held that 28 U.S.C. § 1291 does not confer appellate jurisdiction over an otherwise interlocutory order on class certification following plaintiffs’ voluntary...more
Lanham Act False Advertising - Lanham Act Liability for Native Advertising Violations - Casper Sleep, Inc. v. Mitcham, --- F. Supp. 3d ---, No. 16 Civ. 3224 (JSR), 2016 WL 4574388 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2016) - ...more
One class action-related case, so far: Microsoft v. Baker, case no. 15-457, on certiorari from the Ninth Circuit. The issue: “Whether a federal court of appeals has jurisdiction under both Article III and 28 U.S.C. § 1291...more
One of the strategies employed by class-action defendants has been to submit an offer of settlement pursuant to Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the full amount of the putative class representative's claim....more
Just two months before the U.S. Supreme Court hears argument in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, two federal circuit court panels have ruled on jurisdictional issues presented in the case. Both the Seventh Circuit in Chapman v....more
The 1978 Bankruptcy Code was hailed as a comprehensive bankruptcy overhaul, designed, in part, to eliminate the uncertainty as to which matters could be handled by a bankruptcy referee depending on the outcome of a summary...more
Next term, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether Congress has the power to grant jurisdiction to plaintiffs who have suffered no concrete harm by authorizing them to sue based solely on violations of federal statutes....more
Jurisdiction of Bankruptcy Courts to Enter Final Judgment on “Stern Claims” Based on Consent of Parties Affirmed - The U.S. Supreme Court in Wellness Int’l Network, Ltd. v. Sharif explicitly affirmed the jurisdiction of...more
As we all know, on June 9 of this year, the Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Executive Benefits Ins. Agency vs. Arkison, 134 S. Ct. 2165, 189 L. Ed. 2d 83 (2014), which we had hoped would resolve the open...more
In 2011, the Supreme Court decided Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011), which gave voice to the Court’s grave concerns about the constitutional limits of bankruptcy court jurisdiction and raised several...more