News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Contract Disputes

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Saul Ewing LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Fraudulent-Inducement Theory Under Wire Fraud Statute in Kousisis v. United States

Saul Ewing LLP on

Case Summary - In Kousisis v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed whether a defendant can be convicted under the federal wire fraud statute without causing the victim a net pecuniary loss....more

Gray Reed

Texas Supreme Court Decides Who Must Produce to Maintain an Oil and Gas Lease

Gray Reed on

In Cromwell v. Anadarko E & P Onshore LLC the Supreme Court of Texas did what it so often does: In order to provide “legal certainty and predictability”, the Court considered the plain language of a contract in order to...more

Bracewell LLP

Surface vs. Mineral Owners: Texas Supreme Court Settles Salt Cavern Ownership Dispute

Bracewell LLP on

The Texas Supreme Court has settled the issue of who owns the voids, known as salt caverns, created in subsurface salt formations (whether naturally occurring or caused as a result of salt mining operations). In...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Upholds Fraudulent Inducement Theory of Wire Fraud

Perkins Coie on

On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed prosecutors’ ability to pursue mail and wire fraud charges under the “fraudulent inducement” theory. Under that theory, a defendant need not intend to cause...more

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer

Supreme Court Affirms Fraudulent Inducement Theory in Federal Wire Fraud Prosecutions

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer on

In Kousisis v. United States, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), the Supreme Court resolved a Circuit split addressing the scope of the federal wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Without dissent, the Court held that the government did...more

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti,...

No Harm, Still Foul: Supreme Court Affirms Expansive Reach of Wire Fraud Statute in Kousisis

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti,... on

In a recent decision upholding the expansive reach of the federal wire fraud statute (18 U.S.C. §1343), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Kousisis v. United States, No. 23-909 (May 22, 2025) that a defendant can be convicted of...more

McGuireWoods LLP

Supreme Court Declines to Narrow Reach of Federal Fraud Law

McGuireWoods LLP on

On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court published its opinion in Kousisis v. United States, No. 23-909, 605 U.S. __ (2025), holding that one who induces a victim to enter into a transaction under materially false pretenses may be...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Supreme Court Broadly Interprets Wire Fraud Liability

Fox Rothschild LLP on

On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court held that a defendant could be convicted of federal wire fraud pursuant to 18 USC § 1343 even when the fraud did not result in any economic loss for the victim. This holding expands the...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Texas Supreme Court Reverses Liability Finding Against Franchisor

Fox Rothschild LLP on

A recent Texas Supreme Court decision fully overturned a jury’s finding that a franchisor was liable for the criminal actions of a franchisee’s employee. This decision underscores the importance of a franchisor having clearly...more

McGinnis Lochridge

Who Owns the Empty Space? Texas Supreme Court Affirms Surface Ownership of Salt Caverns in Landmark Ruling

McGinnis Lochridge on

In Myers-Woodward, LLC v. Underground Services Markham, LLC, No. 22-0878, 2025 WL 4356581 (Tex. May 16, 2025), the Texas Supreme Court resolved two significant issues affecting mineral owners and surface owners: (1) who owns...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Write it Down or Forever Hold Your Peace: Texas Supreme Court Rejects Fraud Claims Based on Oral Representations in Mineral Deals

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

On Friday, May 9th, the Supreme Court of Texas addressed important issues regarding the enforcement of written contractual representations in its per curiam opinion styled Roxo Energy Co., LLC et al. v. Baxsto, LLC, ---...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Blocks Use of Administrative Procedure Act to Halt Education Grant Terminations

Holland & Knight LLP on

Federal grantees facing the termination of their grants by the new administration have challenged those terminations by filing suits under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in federal district courts. In about a half a...more

Stinson LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Provides Guidance on Litigation Over Arbitration Clauses

Stinson LLP on

Arbitration agreements are intended to preclude litigating disputes in court, but the U.S. Supreme Court has clarified in two recent decisions — Coinbase Inc. v. Suski and Smith v. Spizzirri — that in certain circumstances,...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

Beware Of Conflicting Terms: When Customers Entered Into Multiple Contracts, Scotus Says Courts Must Decide Which One Governs...

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed on

On May 23, 2024, the United States Supreme Court decided Coinbase, Inc., v. Suski, No. 23-3, serving a reminder to companies with mandatory consumer-facing arbitration provisions that contractual consistency is a key to...more

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP

Supreme Court Says When It Comes to Deciding Arbitration Clauses: “I am the Law”

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP on

On May 23, the Supreme Court issued a decision holding that when parties have two conflicting contracts – one that sends disputes to arbitration and one that sends disputes to the courts – a court, not an arbitrator, must...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Supreme Court Rules That Judges – Not Arbitrators – Must Resolve Disputes Where Various Agreements May Govern a Particular Dispute...

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

In 23-3 Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski (05/23/2024) (supremecourt.gov) (May 23, 2024), the U.S. Supreme Court once again delved into the frequently litigated arena of arbitration agreements. Specifically, the Court considered...more

McGlinchey Stafford

Threshold Arbitrability Questions: SCOTUS Rules that Courts, Not Arbitrators, Must Decide Which Contract Governs

McGlinchey Stafford on

On May 23, 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that when parties have agreed to more than one contract – one that contains a clause sending threshold arbitrability questions to an arbitrator and one that sends those...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Cryptocurrency, Sweepstakes, and the Supreme Court: A Tale of Two Contracts

Troutman Pepper Locke on

On May 23, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski et al., unanimously affirming the Ninth Circuit’s decision holding that when parties have agreed to two contracts — one sending arbitrability...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Recent Cases Give Contractors an Advantage on CDA Claims Jurisdiction

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Federal contractors are winning a safeguard against the government’s practice of moving to dismiss cases brought under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA) for lack of jurisdiction in the late stages of litigation. Recent...more

Perkins Coie

Federal Circuit Holds “Sum Certain” Requirement in Government Contracts Cases Is Nonjurisdictional

Perkins Coie on

Clarifying a significant issue in government contracts litigation against the government, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that the so-called “sum certain” requirement for Contract Disputes Act (CDA)...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Rules that Waiver of Arbitration Right Does Not Require a Showing of Prejudice

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a May 23, 2022 unanimous decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled a showing that the other side has been prejudiced by a delay is not required for a party that has proceeded with litigation to waive its contractual...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Triple Point Technology, Inc v PTT Public Company Ltd – Court of Appeal Overturned

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on

Sir Rupert Jackson sitting in the Court of Appeal had found that the liquidated damages clause providing for liquidated damages to be paid for each day of delay by the contractor “from the due date for delivery up to the date...more

Jaburg Wilk

Putting the Shine on Schein, and What Does Vin Diesel Have to Say About Arbitrations?

Jaburg Wilk on

As Dominic Toretto says: “Ask any racer, any real racer, it doesn’t matter if you win by an inch or a mile, winning’s winning.” “Fast and Furious” is the tenth highest-grossing film series ever, with a combined gross of over...more

Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Declines To Provide Clarity On Threshold Question Of Arbitrability

Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP on

Construction contracts often include arbitration provisions that require any dispute arising out of a project be resolved through binding arbitration. But who decides whether such a dispute is subject to the arbitration...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Recent Federal Court Rulings Favor Airlines in Frequent-Flyer Cases

Holland & Knight LLP on

In April 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Airline Deregulation Act (ADA) preempted a frequent flyer program member's common law claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing because the...more

25 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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 Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide