It has been my privilege to advise and represent the Creosote Council since its founding almost 35 years ago. This month, Dave Webb, who is the Creosote Council’s Administrative Director, and I have published a peer-reviewed, open-access article, Scope and Application of the FIFRA Treated Articles Exemption, in the Journal of Transportation Technologies. Our article […]
EPA Regulation of Wood Preservatives Has Its Limits Read More »
Late last term, the U.S. Supreme Court issued several decisions that reveal, in a variety of contexts, the justices’ current thinking on the role and application of stare decisis. My new Legal Backgrounder for the Washington Legal Foundation, The Fuss Over “Stare Decisis”: Four October Term 2018 Rulings Open Window to Justices’ Current Thinking, discusses
Starry, Starry Fight? Justices Debate “Stare Decisis” Read More »
Trade associations and professional organizations do not have to sit on the sidelines while the Supreme Court or lower appellate courts consider legal issues that may significantly affect their members. Amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs give entire industries and professions a direct line of communication to appellate courts on the policy implications and practical
Make Amicus Briefs Part of Your Advocacy Program Read More »
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren, No. 16-1275 (June 17, 2019), reveals the Justices’ sharply differing views on the role that legislative intent should play in cases involving implied preemption of state law — more specifically, (i) state legislative intent where the issue is whether a state statute is barred under
Virginia Uranium Reveals Fissures in Supreme Court Implied Preemption Jurisprudence Read More »
Note: A version of this March 2019 blog was published by DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar in For The Defense (June 2019) under the title “Newest Justices Dueling Opinions Sparkle.” The Supreme Court’s two newest members—Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch—are brilliant legal writers. Their first Supreme Court opinions reflected the superb drafting skills
Newest Justices’ Dueling Opinions Sparkle Read More »
The federal False Claims Act continues to lure prospective “qui tam relators” (i.e., whistle blowers ), and their attorneys, with a gleaming pot of gold. To reach the end of the rainbow, a qui tam relator must file, on behalf of the United States, a suit alleging that a government contractor, Medicare/Medicaid provider, or other
It’s Time for the Supreme Court To Stop Fueling False Claims Whistle-Blower Suits Read More »
Thank you Law 360 subscribers for making my op-ed, A Broader View of the US Supreme Court Bar, that publication’s second-most-read expert analysis during the week of April 22. Law 360 subscribers can access the op-ed here, and anyone can download a copy by clicking above. Earlier in April, I had posted the op-ed on
Law360 Op-Ed on “the Supreme Court Bar” Attracts Wide Readership Read More »
Reprinted from The Voice (April 3, 2019), published by DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s first Supreme Court opinion is a model of stylistic clarity and judicial restraint. Writing for a unanimous Court, his January 8, 2019 opinion in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., No. 17-1272, holds that where
Justice Kavanaugh’s Debut Supreme Court Opinion Read More »
Last Spring, shortly before being nominated to the Supreme Court, D.C. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh issued an opinion that protects the confidentiality of internal communications between company employees and in-house attorneys. His opinion in Federal Trade Commission v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 892 F.3d 1264 (2018), holds that the attorney-client privilege applies to an internal corporate
Kavanaugh Opinion Protects Internal Corporate Communications Read More »
Effective use of amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs is an important part of appellate practice in federal and state courts. Every lawyer who is handling or managing an appeal should “think amicus.” In other words, think about whether submission of one or more amicus briefs would be helpful to your client’s position. Thinking
