Photo of Tadhg Dooley

Tadhg Dooley

Subscribe to Tadhg Dooley's Posts

Tadhg is a Partner in the firm’s Litigation Department, where he focuses his practice on appellate and complex civil litigation. Tadhg has extensive experience handling appeals in state and federal courts throughout the country.

Follow:Read more about Tadhg DooleyTadhg's Linkedin Profile

As promised, we’re back with summaries of the four decisions the Court handed down earlier this week. There’s a lot to get through, so we’ll proceed right to it.

First up, in Taggart v. Lorenzen (No. 18-489), a unanimous Court provided helpful guidance to anyone who wants to try to collect a debt in violation of a bankruptcy court’s discharge order: You can only…

Read More Taggart v. Lorenzen (No. 18-489), Fort Bend County v. Davis (No. 18-525), Azar v. Allina Health Services (No. 17-1484), Mont v. United States (No. 17-8995)

The annual June deluge has commenced, with four new opinions yesterday: Azar v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (No. 17-1484), holding that the Government violated its statutory obligation to provide notice and a 60-day comment period when it issued a new rule regarding Medicare payments to hospitals; Taggart v. Lorenzen (No. 18-489), holding that a bankruptcy court may hold a creditor in…

Read More Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (No. 18-483), Nieves v. Bartlett (No. 17-1174), Home Depot USA v. Jackson (No. 17-1417), Smith v. Berryhill (No. 17-1417)

Wiggin and Dana’s Supreme Court Update authors looked back at the term’s cases and themes so far, and looked ahead toward the big decisions to come. The program titled, The Supreme Court October Term 2018: A Look Back and A Look Ahead, was at the New Haven Lawn Club on May 30, 2019. Wiggin and Dana attorneys Tadhg Dooley and David Roth were panelists along…

Read More The Supreme Court October Term 2018: A Look Back and A Look Ahead

Three more decisions to report this week, adding to the list we’ll be discussing next week at the New Haven Lawn Club. We’re grateful and excited to have Professors Kate Stith and Stephen Gilles on board to help us talk through OT18’s cases and themes, as well as what to expect in the coming June deluge. As a reminder, we’re offering NY and CT CLE…

Read More Mission Product Holdings v. Tempnology, Inc. (No. 17-1657), Merck Sharp & Dohme v. Albrecht (No. 17-290), Herrera v. Wyoming (No 17-532)

The Nine handed down three more decisions this morning, which we’ll have summarized for you in due course, but this Update will cover last week’s news, John Oliver style. There were also three decisions last week, including a significant antitrust defeat for Apple and a decision overruling a somewhat obscure precedent, which had the dissenters worrying about far less obscure precedents. Plus, more sniping over…

Read More Apple, Inc. v. Pepper (No. 17-204), Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt (No. 17-1299), Cochise Consultancy, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Billy Joe Hunt (No. 18-315)

Last week, The Nine heard the final arguments of the term, so we’re officially in the home stretch. We’ve got two decisions and a few orders to report to you today, but first: Save the Date! On May 30th, we will be hosting a discussion of the current term—both a look back at the big decisions so far and a look ahead to the bigger…

Read More Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela (No. 17-988), Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority (No. 17-1201), and Emulex Corp. v. Varjabaedian (No. 17-459)