On October 6, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court denied an August 14, 2014, petition for writ of certiorari by Joel Esquenazi and Carlos Rodriquez, former owners of Terra Communications (Terra). The petition asked the court to define who counts as a foreign official under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).
Supreme Court’s 2014-15 Term: Antitrust Case May Impact the Activities of Alcohol Industry Public/Private Organizations
On October 14, 2014, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in a case that could have significant implications for hybrid public/private “regulatory” bodies. Many such bodies, like state and local wine commissions, operate in the alcohol beverage space.
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in two Fourth Circuit FCA cases—United States ex rel. Bunk v. Gosselin World Wide Moving, N.V., 741 F.3d 390 (4th Cir. 2013), cert. denied, No. 13-1399 (U.S. Oct. 6, 2014), and United States ex rel. Rostholder v. Omnicare, Inc., 745 F.3d 694 (4th Cir. 2013), cert. denied, No. 13-1411 (U.S. Oct. 6, 2014).
SCOTUS Grants Certiorari to Two Immigration-Based Cases for 2015 Term: Will the Government Have to Explain Its Exercise of “Discretion”?
The United States Supreme Court is back in session as of last Monday, Oct. 6—often referred to as “First Monday” due to the fact that the term must begin on the first Monday of October by law.
So, Tibble, Tibble, toil and trouble, to paraphrase (badly) Shakespeare (MacBeth, to be precise). And with that, I am going to launch into what I expect will be a number of posts concerning the Supreme Court’s decision to accept the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Tibble for review, limited to the application of ERISA’s six year statute of limitations.
We all know that “everything on the Internet is true” or at least as presented in Amicus (friend-of-the-court) briefs to the US Supreme Justices who have to figure “out how to distinguish between real facts and Internet facts.”
In recent years State Attorneys General (AGs) frequently have played the role of both active litigant and friend-of-the-court in cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and the upcoming 2014 term is proving to be no different.
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to settle a conflict in lower federal and state courts regarding whether judicial candidates may personally solicit campaign contributions.
What Does the Employer Know, and When Does It Know It? SCOTUS Grants Cert in EEOC V. Abercrombie Religious Discrimination Suit
On October 2, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to weigh in on the long-running litigation between EEOC and Abercrombie & Fitch over the retailer’s decision not to hire a Muslim teenager who interviewed for a position in a headscarf that violated its “Look” policy.