The Third Circuit challenges the long-held view that the timing requirements for Tax Court review of a notice of deficiency preclude any extension or delay of the filing deadline. Culp v. Commissioner is the first case in...more
Where a company’s liquidation is necessary, deciding who or where is best placed to administer an orderly wind down for the benefit of creditors can be difficult: the shortfall of assets in an insolvency will highlight...more
Last week, Judge Linda Lopez of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California dismissed the class action lawsuit against Netgain Technology due to the lack of personal jurisdiction over the business. The...more
This week, the Court of Appeals added some nuance to an issue that has plagued appellants for many years: the calculation of the appeal period when a judgment is not properly served but an appellant nonetheless has “actual...more
When harmed or in heated disputes, companies sometimes think about bringing the “big guns”—law enforcement agencies—into the fight. Often acting through counsel, a business may seek to refer a matter to the government for...more
The Supreme Court ruled on several cases involving class actions in the last few months. A case awaiting certiorari could dramatically change the jurisdictional requirements for plaintiffs in class actions across the country....more
Two partnerships and infighting between relators recently produced a series of difficult questions addressed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in In re Plavix Mktg., Sales Practices & Prod. Liab. Litig. (No....more
On July 28, the Ninth Circuit held in a putative automotive class action that the jurisdictional requirements of the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) do not override the more specific jurisdictional requirements under the...more
Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, manufacturers, suppliers, and distributors are attempting to mitigate the risks that accompany supply chain disruptions by incorporating a variety of related terms into their force majeure...more
The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”) greatly expanded federal subject matter jurisdiction over class action lawsuits. By providing for diversity jurisdiction where the parties are not completely diverse (i.e., where...more
During normal times, creditors face a number of requirements when looking to exercise their self-help repossession rights in the event of a borrower’s default. Some of the factors a creditor must normally consider are...more
Recent Federal District Court Decision Highlights the Complexity of Jurisdictional Issues in Challenging Government Awards of Other Transaction Agreements....more
Rhode Island is trying to put the brakes on a federal lawsuit brought by the trucking industry that could steer the state’s truck toll system into a ditch. The outcome could create speed bumps for transportation agencies...more
Foreign states and their agencies engage in a variety of construction projects in the United States, all of which are subject to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSA”)....more
This month's key California employment law cases involve EEOC charges, disability discrimination, and meal breaks....more
In Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 1843 (2019), the Supreme Court of the United States resolved a split among lower appellate courts over whether the requirement that employees file a charge with the Equal...more
This edition of Employment Flash looks at developments in labor and employment law, including a Supreme Court ruling that Title VII’s charge-filing requirement is nonjurisdictional and new state legislation in New York,...more
Last month the U.S. Supreme Court simultaneously resolved a long-running dispute about procedure under Title VII and sent a message to employers that it is important to pay attention and act promptly when faced with a Title...more
In Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the requirement in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act that an employee file a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity...more
Before initiating a lawsuit under Title VII, a complainant must first file a charge of discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within 180 days of the alleged act of discrimination....more
On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Fort Bend County v. Davis that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement is a claims-processing requirement, not a jurisdictional requirement, which means...more
In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Title VII’s charge-filing precondition to suit is not a jurisdictional requirement and is instead a procedural prescription that is subject to forfeiture, refusing to...more
The Situation: The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that filing a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to bringing a Title VII lawsuit. The...more
On June 3, 2019, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, resolving a circuit split regarding whether Title VII’s charge-filing requirement with the Equal Employment Opportunity...more
In Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis (U.S. June 3, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court (Court) held that the charge-filing requirement under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) is not jurisdictional. The case...more