Amicus Briefs Do Not Require Disqualification Of Supreme Court Justices

On November 13, 2023, the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States issued a self-enforcing Code of Conduct applicable to themselves. The Code of Conduct section titled Disqualification includes the following statement: “Neither the filing of a brief amicus curiae nor the participation ofcounsel for amicus curiae requires a Justice’s disqualification” This statement […]

Amicus Briefs Do Not Require Disqualification Of Supreme Court Justices Read More »

2023 Annual Report – DRI Center for Law and Public Policy

The DRI Center for Law and Public Policy, which I currently have the privilege of chairing, is DRI’s think tank and advocacy voice. Its recently published 2023 Annual Report highlights the multifaceted activities being pursued by The Center’s Legislation & Rules Committee, Public Policy Committee, Amicus Committee, and their many task forces and working groups,

2023 Annual Report – DRI Center for Law and Public Policy Read More »

ALF Argues That Arbitration Act’s “Transportation Worker” Exemption Is Narrow

Section 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) mandates that arbitration agreements “shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable.” 9 U.S.C § 2. Section 1 of the FAA, however, exempts “contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.”  9 U.S.C § 1. The Supreme Court

ALF Argues That Arbitration Act’s “Transportation Worker” Exemption Is Narrow Read More »

ALF & DRI Urge Supreme Court To Limit Civil RICO’s Scope

The Atlantic Legal Foundation and the DRI Center for Law and Public Policy have filed an amicus brief in Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn, No. 23-365, urging the Supreme Court to address the question of whether personal injury claims can be transformed in treble-damages civil RICO suits. Sarah Spencer of Christensen & Jensen and I co-authored

ALF & DRI Urge Supreme Court To Limit Civil RICO’s Scope Read More »

DRI Center for Law and Public Policy Chair Larry Ebner Talks About The Center’s Deep Bench of Civil Litigation Defense Experts

I am privileged to chair the DRI Center for Law and Public Policy. The Center is DRI’s think tank and advocacy voice on issues that are important to the civil litigation defense bar and its clients. Click this 90-second video to learn more.

DRI Center for Law and Public Policy Chair Larry Ebner Talks About The Center’s Deep Bench of Civil Litigation Defense Experts Read More »

DRI Center for Law and Public Policy Meets In San Antonio

More than 50 active members of The DRI Center for Law and Public Policy’s committees, task forces, & working groups participated in terrific brainstorming sessions on October 26 at the DRI Annual Meeting in San Antonio. As the Center’s chair, I was privileged to lead the discussions along with Center Director Jay Ludlam (pictured above). Participants included DRI

DRI Center for Law and Public Policy Meets In San Antonio Read More »

Moving Forward With DRI’s Center for Law and Public Policy

It’s a privilege to be chairing DRI’s Center for Law and Public Policy at a time when so many challenges are confronting the civil litigation defense bar. The July/August 2003 edition of DRI’s For The Defense magazine includes a special section on The Center’s activities. Please read my introductory comments.

Moving Forward With DRI’s Center for Law and Public Policy Read More »

DRI Public Policy Center Proposes Elimination of Amicus Consent/Permission Requirement In Federal Courts of Appeals

On behalf of the DRI Center for Law and Public Policy, I have submitted a letter to the Judicial Conference’s Standing Committee recommending that Fed. R. App. P. 29(a) be amended to eliminate the requirement to obtain the parties’ consent, or the court’s permission, for filing amicus briefs. The Center’s recommendation follows the recent elimination

DRI Public Policy Center Proposes Elimination of Amicus Consent/Permission Requirement In Federal Courts of Appeals Read More »

ALF & DRI Argue That Climate-Change Damages Suits Belong in Federal, Not State, Courts

Bolstered by climate-change activists and the plaintiffs’ contingency-fee bar, more than two dozen state and local governments around the nation have filed state-court suits seeking damages from fossil fuel energy companies for allegedly causing, or contributing to, global climate change through greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions.  Masquerading as state-law nuisance and trespass suits, they seek “climate

ALF & DRI Argue That Climate-Change Damages Suits Belong in Federal, Not State, Courts Read More »

Scroll to Top