January 3 summaries
Artis v. District of Columbia
The word "tolled" in 28 U.S.C. 搂1367(d) means that the state limitations period during pending federal litigation is held in abeyance
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
District Of Columbia v. Wesby
Officers had probable cause to arrest partygoers based on a reasonable belief of 鈥渟ubstantial chance of criminal activity,鈥 established by the totality of the circumstances, and the officers making an arrest pursuant to such probable cause were entitled to qualified immunity from a civil suit.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
National Assn. of Mfrs. v. Department of Defense
Challenges to the Waters of the United States Rule must be filed in federal district courts.
Area(s) of Law:- Environmental Law
February 8 summaries
CNH Industrial N.V. v. Jack Reese
A contract is not ambiguous unless it is subject to more than one reasonable interpretation, and the Yard-Man inferences cannot generate a reasonable interpretation because they are not 鈥渙rdinary principles of contract law.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Contract Law
Class v. United States
By pleading guilty, a federal criminal defendant does not waive the right to directly appeal the constitutionality of the statute under which they were convicted.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Digital Realty Trust, Inc. v. Somers
The Dodd-Frank Act鈥檚 anti-retaliation provision allowing an award to whistleblowers does not extend to those reporters who have not provided information directly to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Murphy v. Smith
Under 42 U.S.C. 搂1997e(d)(2), a district court must use as much of a prisoner鈥檚 judgment as necessary, without exceeding 25%, to discharge an award of attorney鈥檚 fees.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
Rubin, et al., v. Islamic Republic of Iran, et al.
Section 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act identifies property that will be available for attachment and execution in satisfaction of 搂 1605(A) judgments, but it does not in itself divest that property of foreign sovereign immunity.
Area(s) of Law:- Sovereign Immunity
Jennings v. Rodriguez
Aliens detained under 8 U.S.C. 搂搂1225(b)(1),(2) and 8 U.S.C. 搂1226(a) do not have the right to periodic bond hearings.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Merit Management Group, LP v. FTI Consulting, Inc.
To determine whether an entity is included under the 鈥渟afe harbor exception鈥 in the bankruptcy code, 11 U.S.C. 搂546, the court must view financial transaction as a whole and not merely as 鈥渃omponent parts.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Bankruptcy Law
Patchak v. Zinke
Congress does not violate Article III when it enacts a new law directing the federal courts to dismiss certain suits, even when the law retroactively effects pending litigation.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
March 6 summaries
Texas v. New Mexico
The United States may intervene in a lawsuit between to defend its 鈥渄istinctively federal interests,鈥 where various factors collectively persuade the Court to permit such intervention.
Area(s) of Law:- Water Rights
U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC
A designation of "non-statutory insider" status on an individual for purposes of Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings requires findings of basic or historical fact which are appropriately reviewed for clear error.
Area(s) of Law:- Bankruptcy Law
Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund
SLUSA鈥檚 amendment to the Securities Act of 1933 does not deprive state courts of jurisdiction over class actions only alleging violations of the 1933 Act and does not affect the 1933 Act鈥檚 removal ban.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Ayestas v. Davis
A funding request under 18 U.S.C. 搂3599(f) requires the funding applicant to show that a reasonable attorney would regard the services as sufficiently important.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
Marinello v. United States
To convict under 26 U. S. C. 搂7212(a), the finder of fact must determine that the defendant had knowledge of a particular proceeding or could have reasonably foreseen that a particular proceeding would commence.
Area(s) of Law:- Tax Law
Hall v. Hall
When consolidated under FRCP 42(a), cases retain their distinct identities such that when a final judgment is rendered in one, it confers upon the losing party the immediate right of appeal, regardless of whether any of the other consolidated cases remains unresolved.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
April 8 summaries
Encino Motorcars v. Navarro
Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 搂231(b)(10)(A), automobile dealership service advisors are not entitled to overtime compensation because they are "salesm[e]n ... primarily engaged in ... servicing automobiles."
Area(s) of Law:- Employment Law
Kisela v. Hughes
Qualified immunity protects officials from civil suit when the official鈥檚 conduct does not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Sessions v. Dimaya
With respect to the Immigration and Nationality Act, 18 U.S.C. 搂16(b) is unconstitutionally vague; in part because the similarly worded 鈥渞esidual clause鈥 in the Armed Career Criminal Act was held unconstitutionally vague in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015).
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
United States v. Microsoft Corp.
The recently enacted CLOUD Act effectively amended the Stored Communications Act to require a U.S. email provider to disclose electronic information stored abroad.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Wilson v. Sellers
A federal habeas court should presume that an unexplained decision by a reviewing state court adopts the same reasoning as that provided by the last related lower court opinion unless the state provides evidence of reliance on other grounds.
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
Jesner v. Arab Bank
Liability under 28 U.S.C. 搂 1350, Alien Tort Statute (ATS), does not extend to foreign corporations.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Oil States Energy Services v. Greene's Energy Group
Inter partes review of patent validity under 35 U.S.C. 搂搂 6, 316(c) does not trigger Article III requirements for a jury trial, nor does it violate the Seventh Amendment.
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
SAS Institute v. Ianca
In an inter partes review pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 搂搂311-319, the Patent Office must decide the patentability of every claim challenged by the petitioner.
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
May 9 summaries
Byrd v. United States
One who is in lawful possession and control of a rental car has a reasonable expectation of privacy in it even when they are not listed as an authorized driver on the rental agreement.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Dahda v. United States
A wiretap order is not facially insufficient if it includes the information required by 18 U. S. C. 搂2518, even if the order exceeds its proper territorial jurisdiction.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
McCoy v. Louisiana
The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to choose the objective of his defense and to insist that his counsel refrain from admitting guilt, even when counsel鈥檚 experienced-based view is that confessing guilt offers the defendant the best chance to avoid the death penalty.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn.
The provision prohibiting state authorization of sports gambling schemes in the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, 28 U.S.C. 搂 3701, violates the anti-commandeering principle of the Constitution.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
United States v. Sanchez-Gomez
A criminal defendant鈥檚 appeal becomes moot when the criminal case concludes before the appellate court can render its decision.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis
The National Labor Relations Act does not overrule the enforcement of individual arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act.
Area(s) of Law:- Arbitration
Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Lundgren
Prior decision in County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of Yakima Nation, 502 U.S. 251, does not foreclose tribal sovereign immunity defenses for in rem actions as traditionally believed.
Area(s) of Law:- Indian Law
Collins v. Virginia
The automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment鈥檚 warrant requirement does not extend to the search of a home, its curtilage, or any vehicle found therein.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Lagos v. United States
Under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act, reimbursement awards to victims are limited only to expenses incurred during government investigations and criminal proceedings, but do not include expenses incurred during private investigations or civil proceedings.
Area(s) of Law:- Bankruptcy Law
June 27 summaries
Azar v. Garza
When a civil case becomes moot, it is established practice to reverse or vacate the lower court鈥檚 judgment and remand with directions to dismiss the case.
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
Hughes v. United States
Sentence reductions are available for plea deals under 18 U.S.C. 搂 3582(c)(2) when the guideline range is lowered, so long as the range was considered when the sentence was imposed.
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
Koons v. United States
Those whose sentences are 鈥渂ased on鈥 mandatory minimums and substantial assistance to the Government do not qualify for sentence reductions under revised 鈥淕uideline ranges.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. Appling
A single-asset statement qualifies as a "statement respecting the debtor's financial condition" for purposes of 11 U.S.C. 搂523(a)(2).
Area(s) of Law:- Bankruptcy Law
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd., et al. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, et al.
Members of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission exhibited an impermissible hostility towards religion and engaged in viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment.
Area(s) of Law:- First Amendment
China Agritech Inc. v. Resh
Upon denial of class certification, the statute of limitations is not tolled for a putative class member who failed to promptly join an existing suit or file an individual action and seeks to commence the class action anew.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute
The Ohio voter removal process does not violate the National Voter Registration Act.
Area(s) of Law:- Election Law
Sveen v. Melin
Retroactive application of state statute rescinding any revocable beneficiary designations in the event of divorce, does not violate the Constitution's Contracts Clause.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky
The statutory prohibition of certain apparel in polling places during Election Day serves the permissible objective of limiting distraction and partisan discord for voters exercising their civic duty, but such statutes must articulate a determinate scope to allow for reasoned application.
Area(s) of Law:- Election Law
Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical
When interpreting a foreign law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1, a federal court must "accord respectful consideration" to a foreign government鈥檚 interpretation of the law, but is not bound by this interpretation.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Benisek v. Lamone
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Petitioners鈥 motion for a preliminary injunction because the balance of equities and the public interest tilted against the motion.
Area(s) of Law:- Election Law
Chavez-Meza v. United States
Where the record demonstrates that a judge has expressed a reasoned basis for a non-proportional sentence reduction, the explanation is adequate to support the sentence reduction.
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
Gill v. Whitford
A 鈥渃itizen鈥檚 abstract interest in policies adopted by the legislature鈥 is insufficient to demonstrate Article III standing.
Area(s) of Law:- Standing
Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach
Existence of probable cause for an arrest does not bar a claim under 42 USC 搂 1983 where an official policy of retaliation against the exercise of free speech is alleged.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights 搂 1983
Rosales-Mireles v. United States
Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b), a defendant is ordinarily entitled to relief if there was a miscalculation in determining the Sentencing Guidelines Range.
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
Lucia v. SEC
The Security and Exchange Commission's administrative law judges are 鈥淥fficers of the United States,鈥 and are therefore subject to the Appointments Clause.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Pereira v. Sessions
A document that is titled 鈥渘otice to appear鈥 but does not include time-and-place information cannot qualify as a 鈥渘otice to appear鈥 under 8 U. S. C. 1229(a) and thus does not trigger the stop-time rule.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc.
States have the authority to require out-of-state retailers with no physical presence within the state to collect and remit a sales tax.
Area(s) of Law:- Tax Law
Wisconsin Central Ltd. v. United States
Employee stock options are not taxable compensation for purposes of the Railroad Retirement Tax Act, 26 U.S.C. 搂 3231(e)(1).
Area(s) of Law:- Tax Law
Carpenter v. United States
The Government conducts a Fourth Amendment search when it accesses cell phone records that include cell-site location information.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Currier v. Virginia
The Double Jeopardy Clause of the 14th Amendment does not bar the re-litigating of issues or introduction of evidence for a severed offense, where the Defendant requested severance of the trials and has been acquitted of the related charges.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Ortiz v. United States
A judge鈥檚 simultaneous service on the Court of Criminal Appeals and the Court of Military Commission Review violates neither 搂973(b)(2)(A) nor the Appointments Clause.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp.
Damages for lost foreign profits are recoverable under 搂284 of the Patent Act if the domestic nature of the infringement is proven under 搂271(f)(2).
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
Abbott v. Perez
28 U. S. C. 搂1253 grants jurisdiction for review where an order has the same practical effect as an order granting or denying an injunction and past discrimination does not affect the presumption of legislative good faith in the case of a legislature鈥檚 redistricting plan.
Area(s) of Law:- Election Law
Ohio v. American Express
Anti-steering provisions within a merchant contract are not per-se anticompetitive under the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Area(s) of Law:- Corporations
National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
The California Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency Act's notification requirements likely violate the First Amendment.
Area(s) of Law:- First Amendment
Trump v. Hawaii
Proclamation No. 9645 is within the President鈥檚 broad discretion Under 8 U.S.C. 搂 1182(f) and 搂 1152(a)(1)(A) to suspend entry into the United States and Respondents did not establish a likelihood of success on the merits that the Proclamation violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
July 0 summaries
August 0 summaries
September 0 summaries
October 0 summaries
November 2 summaries
Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido
Construction of the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967's definitional provisions includes 鈥淪tates or political subsidies鈥 irrespective of its number of employees.
Area(s) of Law:- Employment Law
Weyerhaeuser Co. v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
An area designated as a critical habitat under 搂1533(a)(3)(A)(i) must exist as a habitat for the species listed as endangered, and the Secretary of Interior鈥檚 decision not to exclude an area from critical habitat under 搂1533(b)(2) is subject to judicial review.
Area(s) of Law:- Environmental Law
December 1 summary
United States v. Stitt
Whether burglary of a non permanent or mobile structure that is adapted or used for overnight accommodation can qualify as 鈥榖urglary鈥 under the Armed Career Criminal Act,18 U. S. C. 搂924(e)
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law