We’re back to round out our coverage of the Court’s recent activity, with Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds (10-1261), considering tolling of the time to bring suits against corporate insiders for “short-swing” profits under Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Roberts v. Sea-Land Services, Inc. (10-1399), on the appropriate measure for capping benefits under the Longshore and Harbor
Read More Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds (10-1261), Roberts v. Sea-Land Services, Inc. (10-1399) and Order List
Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington (10-945) and Rehberg v. Paulk (10-788)
Today we bring you a double-header with decisions on arrestee searches, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington (10-945), and immunity from § 1983 suits for grand jury witnesses, Rehberg v. Paulk (10-788).
If the unlikely event that you’ve been thinking about committing a crime, even a very minor one, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of
Read More Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington (10-945) and Rehberg v. Paulk (10-788)
Federal Aviation Administration v. Cooper (10-1024) and Setser v. United States (10-7387)
Today, we bring you Federal Aviation Administration v. Cooper (10-1024), in which the Court determined that people harmed by violations of the federal Privacy Act may sue the government only for economic injuries, not mental or emotional distress, and Setser v. United States (10-7387), where the Court considered whether a district court may order a federal sentence to be consecutive to a state
Read More Federal Aviation Administration v. Cooper (10-1024) and Setser v. United States (10-7387)
Zivotofsky v. Clinton (10-699) and Vartelas v. Holder (10-1211)
The Justices apparently have no trouble multi-tasking, issuing 5 decisions and an order list this week, all while hearing the longest and most-watched arguments of the Term (and the possibly the decade) regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Monday brought technical arguments about whether the Anti-Injunction Act prohibits a challenge to PPACA until its individual mandate and accompanying penalty/tax goes into effect
Read More Zivotofsky v. Clinton (10-699) and Vartelas v. Holder (10-1211)
Part I: Missouri v. Frye (10-444), Lafler v. Cooper (10-209) and Martinez v. Ryan (10-1001)
This week, the Court shone the spotlight on the Sixth Amendment with a triple feature of cases involving the ineffective assistance of counsel. The first two have created a splash: In Missouri v. Frye (10-444) and Lafler v. Cooper (10-209), the Court ruled for the first time that defendants have a constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel during plea bargaining. When a lawyer
Read More Part I: Missouri v. Frye (10-444), Lafler v. Cooper (10-209) and Martinez v. Ryan (10-1001)
Part II: Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (10-1150), Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland (10-1016), Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (10-1062) and Order List
We’re back with Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (10-1150), a major patent decision addressing when inventions involving “laws of nature” can be patented; Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland (10-1016), on State employers’ immunity from suit under the “self-care” provision of the Family and Medical Leave Act; Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (10-1062), on whether review is available under
Read More Part II: Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (10-1150), Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland (10-1016), Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (10-1062) and Order List