image description

Archives

  • ERISA—Preemption of State Health-Care Reporting Requirements

    ERISA establishes uniform national standards and obligations for the fiduciaries of employee benefit plans. With certain exceptions, it preempts “any and all State laws insofar as they . . . relate to any employee benefit plan” covered by the statute. 29 U.S.C. § 1144(a). Various provisions of ERISA impose mandatory reporting requirements on covered plans. […]

  • Indian Tribes—Jurisdiction of Tribal Courts over Nonmembers

    In Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981), the Supreme Court recognized that, as a general matter, the “inherent sovereign powers of an Indian Tribe do not extend to the activities of nonmembers of the tribe.” The Court also recognized an exception to that general rule, however, holding that tribes retain some authority “over […]

  • Class Actions And Collective Actions—Class-Certification Standards

    Under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court may not certify a damages lawsuit as a class action unless “there are questions of law or fact common to the class” that “predominate over any questions affecting only individual members.” The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) imposes similar certification requirements on collective […]

  • Justiciability—Mootness—Effect of Offer of Judgment Prior To Class Certification

    Article III of the Constitution limits the jurisdiction of the federal courts to “cases” and “controversies.” The Supreme Court has held that “‘an actual controversy … be extant at all stages of review, not merely at the time the complaint is filed.’” Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43, 67 (1997). Accordingly, “[i]f […]

  • Federal Power Act—Federal Regulation of Demand Response in the Wholesale Energy Market

    The Federal Power Act grants the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission exclusive jurisdiction over “the sale of electric energy at wholesale in interstate commerce.” 16 U.S.C. § 824(b)(1). FERC may regulate any “rule, regulation, practice, or contract affecting [a wholesale] rate.” Id. § 824e(a). But only states may regulate “any other sale of electric energy”—namely retail sales to […]

  • Employment Discrimination—Filing Period for a Constructive-Discharge Claim

    Today, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Green v. Donahoe, No. 14-613, to decide, in the context of a suit brought by a former federal employee, whether the filing period for a constructive-discharge claim begins to run when the employee resigns or when the employer commits the last allegedly discriminatory act leading to the resignation. […]

  • Class Actions—Article III Standing To Sue For Statutory Violations

    Under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, a plaintiff must allege that he or she has suffered an “injury-in-fact” to establish standing to sue in federal court. Today, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339, to decide whether Congress may confer Article III standing by authorizing a private right of […]

  • Employee Retirement Income Security Act—Equitable Relief for Benefit Overpayments

    When a fiduciary to an employee benefit plan overpays a plan participant, the fiduciary must resort to remedies offered by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Section 502(a)(3) of ERISA authorizes a fiduciary to recover “appropriate equitable relief”—a nebulous concept that has triggered much litigation. That provision permits a fiduciary to enforce an equitable […]

  • Federal Arbitration Act—Preemption of State Law

    Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011), the California Supreme Court (and a number of other state courts) had declared that waivers of class-wide arbitration were unenforceable as a matter of state law. But in Concepcion, the Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act […]

  • Equal Credit Opportunity Act—Eligibility of Guarantors for Statutory Protections

    The Equal Credit Opportunity Act makes it “unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction … on the basis of … marital status.” 15 U.S.C. § 1691(a). The ECOA defines “applicant” to include “any person who applies to a creditor directly for an extension, renewal, or continuation of credit, or […]

  • Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act—Scope of Conduct “Based Upon” Activities Within the United States

    The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) generally confers immunity from suit for foreign nations in United States courts, but there is an exception for suits “based upon a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state.” 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2). On January 23, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in OBB Personenverkehr […]

  • Cases of Interest to the Business Community

    In recent weeks, the Supreme Court has also invited the Solicitor General to file briefs expressing the views of the United States in the following cases of interest to the business community: Google Inc. v. Oracle America, Inc., No. 14-410: The question presented is whether copyright protection extends to all elements of an original work […]

  • Fourteenth Amendment—Right to Recognition of Marriages of Same-Sex Couples Under State Law

    In United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013), the Supreme Court invalidated federal laws and regulations to the extent that they denied benefits to same-sex couples who were married in any of the thirty-six states that now permit same-sex couples to marry. On Friday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in four consolidated cases […]

  • Takings Clause—Price-Stabilization Reserve Requirements

    In Horne v. Department of Agriculture, 133 S. Ct. 2053 (2013), the Supreme Court held that raisin growers who object to a federal price-stabilization program can challenge the constitutionality of the price-stabilization program as a defense to an enforcement action brought by the government. That program, the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, 7 U.S.C. §§ 601 […]

  • Case of Interest to the Business Community

    Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., No. 14-181: The question presented is whether the Second Circuit erred in holding that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) preempts Vermont’s health care database law as applied to the third-party administrator for a self-funded ERISA plan.

  • Bankruptcy Code—Appealability of Order Denying Confirmation of Plan

    Under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1), litigants in bankruptcy cases may appeal “final decisions, judgments, orders, and decrees” of district courts and bankruptcy appellate panels. Last Friday, at the urging of both petitioner and respondent, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Bullard v. Hyde Park Savings Bank, No. 14-116, to decide whether an order denying confirmation […]

  • Bankruptcy Code—Disposition of Funds Held By Chapter 13 Trustee After Conversion to Chapter 7

    Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code allows debtors to repay their creditors by turning a portion of their monthly income over to a trustee for distribution to those creditors. At any time, however, a debtor may convert a Chapter 13 case to one under Chapter 7. Congress has provided that except where the conversion is […]

  • Patent Law—Enforceability of a Royalty Agreement Beyond the Patent Term

    In Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U.S. 29 (1964), the Supreme Court held that a patent licensing agreement is per seunenforceable to the extent that it requires the licensee to pay royalties after the patent expires. The Court reasoned that such an agreement is an impermissible effort to extend the patent beyond its term. In […]

  • Patent Act—Induced Infringement—Defense of Good-Faith Belief of Invalidity

    35 U.S.C. § 271(b) imposes liability on anyone who “actively induces infringement of a patent.” In 2011, the Supreme Court held that Section 271(b) requires actual “knowledge that the induced acts constitute patent infringement.” Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., 131 S. Ct. 2060, 2068 (2011). Today, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Commil USA, […]

  • Clean Air Act—EPA’s Consideration of Costs in Decision to Regulate the Emission of Hazardous Air Pollutants by Power Plants

    Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 7412), requires the Environmental Protection Agency to list major sources of hazardous air pollutants and then to promulgate emission standards for those sources. Within this framework, Congress carved out a listing analysis that applies only to […]