Wiggin and Dana’s Appellate Practice Group Presents: October Term 2022: The Home Stretch
Posted in Events
On April 26, 2023, Wiggin and Dana’s Supreme Court Update Authors Tadhg Dooley and David Roth, and Quinnipiac University Law School Professor of Law and SCOTUS blog contributor Stephen G. Gilles looked back at the term’s cases and themes so far, and looked ahead toward the big decisions to come.
Read More Wiggin and Dana’s Appellate Practice Group Presents: October Term 2022: The Home StretchAxon Enterprise, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission (No. 21-86), Turkiye Halk Bankasi, A.S. v. United States (No. 21-1450),MOAC Mall Holdings, LLC v. Transform Holdco LLC (No. 21-1270), New York v. New Jersey (No. 156, Orig.), Reed v. Goertz (No. 21-442)
Posted in OT22, Supreme Court Updates
The Court was busy this week, with four new decisions to go along with one from last Friday. No wonder it extended the temporary “administrative stay” placed on the hot-potato mifepristone appeals from Wednesday evening to midnight tonight. As of press time, the Court has not issued a decision, so we’ll keep our focus on the cases that have been decided in the last week:…
Read More Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission (No. 21-86), Turkiye Halk Bankasi, A.S. v. United States (No. 21-1450),MOAC Mall Holdings, LLC v. Transform Holdco LLC (No. 21-1270), New York v. New Jersey (No. 156, Orig.), Reed v. Goertz (No. 21-442)Wilkins v. United States (No. 21-1164)
Posted in OT22, Supreme Court Updates
The Court continued its slow drip of decisions in less-prominent cases this week with Wilkins v. United States (No. 21-1164), which addressed whether the limitations period for suits against the government under the Quiet Title Act is “jurisdictional” or not. But this time, the decision wasn’t unanimous, with six of the justices concluding the limitations period was simply a non-jurisdictional defense, over a dissent…
Read More Wilkins v. United States (No. 21-1164)Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (No. 21-887)
Posted in OT22, Supreme Court Updates
This week, the Court heard argument in a pair of interesting trademark cases: Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International (No. 21-1043), which asks whether U.S. trademark law applies to conduct in foreign countries; and Jack Daniel’s Properties v. VIP Products (No. 22-148), addressing just how much the First Amendment protects dog-poop jokes at the expense of a famous consumer brand. But on the…
Read More Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (No. 21-887)