U.S. Supreme Court rules against prisoner in lawyer fee case
A U.S. Supreme Court ruling will mean that prisoners who win civil rights lawsuits against their jailers will generally be handing over more of their winnings to their lawyers.
A U.S. Supreme Court ruling will mean that prisoners who win civil rights lawsuits against their jailers will generally be handing over more of their winnings to their lawyers.
From the filing of the first complaint in 2014 to an appellate court decision, Indiana’s ban on same-sex marriage was overturned in a little less than seven months. Subsequent cases regarding rights and discrimination against gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender individuals have slowed considerably.
America’s union leaders are about to find out if they were right to fiercely oppose Neil Gorsuch’s nomination to the Supreme Court as a pivotal, potentially devastating vote against organized labor.
Like a number of states, Minnesota bars voters from wearing political items to the polls to reduce the potential for confrontations or voter intimidation. But that could change. The Supreme Court on Feb. 28 will consider a challenge to the state’s law, in a case that could affect other states, too.
Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill has joined a 10-state amicus brief in a U.S. Supreme Court case he said could make police officers’ jobs more difficult.
Attorneys at Faegre Baker Daniels LLP are part of the legal team representing Michigan voters who filed a complaint in December over partisan gerrymandering. The suit brought to seven the number of such challenges filed since 2016 and fueled hope that the U.S. Supreme Court will rule the practice unconstitutional and offer guidance for how to draw district lines.
The U.S. Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal from the Texas Democratic Party charging that the Republican-controlled Legislature illegally gerrymandered the state’s electoral maps.
On the heels of a call from the U.S. Supreme Court to review the judiciary’s sexual harassment response policies, the U.S. Courts Administrative Office has established a working group to review the safeguards in place for protecting court employees from inappropriate workplace conduct.
The Supreme Court agreed Friday to wade into the issue of sales tax collection on internet purchases in a case that could force consumers to pay more for certain purchases and allow states to recoup what they say is billions in lost revenue annually.
The United States Supreme Court’s justices put themselves in the driver’s seat Tuesday, hearing arguments in two cases involving vehicle searches, but it was unclear what routes the justices will take to resolve the cases.
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts used his end-of-the-year report to highlight the “new challenge” of sexual harassment coming in 2018.
A man convicted in federal court of two armed robberies will get a chance at a more lenient sentence after the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals determined recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent warranted review of the sentence previously imposed on the man.
The Indiana Court of Appeals has struck down a claim for a private right of action raised under Indiana’s medical record production statute, but allowed a spoliation claim against a doctor who no longer possesses a patient’s medical records to proceed. However, two judges urged the Indiana Supreme Court to reconsider a 1991 opinion that required them to strike the private right of action claim.
Massachusetts is being sued by 13 other states that claim a voter-approved law to ban the sale of eggs and other food products from farm animals that are confined in overly restrictive cages is unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court is leaving in place a lower court ruling that a federal employment discrimination law doesn't protect a person against discrimination based on their sexual orientation.
Accused infringers might have a greater incentive to save their patent invalidity arguments for federal court or International Trade Commission litigation after the U.S. Supreme Court renders its decision in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Matal, U.S., No. 16-969.
Although it only affirms what has been said before, a September decision from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals is nevertheless surging in popularity among inventors and their attorneys because it reminds the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that the standard of “broadest reasonable interpretation” for evaluating patent applications does not mean “broadest possible interpretation.”
In the wake of hefty attorney fees and an onslaught of what was viewed as unnecessary litigation filed by “patent trolls,” Congress authorized the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to begin conducting inter partes reviews of patent challenges in 2012 as an efficient and cost-effective alternative to patent litigation. But now, the popular IPR process could be in jeopardy as the United States Supreme Court considers whether federal law requires patent challenges to be adjudicated in court.
Lawyers for President Donald Trump argued on Tuesday that a defamation lawsuit filed by a former contestant on his reality TV show “The Apprentice” who accused him of unwanted sexual contact should at least be blocked while he’s in office because he’s too busy and important.
His vote likely to decide the outcome, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy voiced competing concerns Tuesday about respecting the religious beliefs of a Colorado baker who wouldn’t make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, and the gay couple’s dignity.