According to Webster’s, a “switcheroo” is “an unexpected reversal or change.” When a federal department or agency pulls a switcheroo on the public or an industry by abruptly reversing a long-held interpretation of a key statutory phrase, there can be serious economic or other consequences for those who are affected. In an opinion issued on […]
Labor Department “Switcheroo” Gets No Respect From Supreme Court Read More »
As the attached article explains, Justice Scalia’s 1988 “government contractor defense” opinion in Boyle v. United Technologies established an important preemption principle that not only includes, but also extends beyond, product liability suits involving military equipment.
Boyle – Justice Scalia’s Gift to Government Contractors Read More »
The federal Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 704, authorizes companies or individuals to obtain judicial review when they are aggrieved by “final agency action.” This long-standing statutory right to go to court to challenge final actions by federal departments and agencies is sacrosanct among federally regulated industries and companies. In a unanimous decision
Justices Reject U.S. Attempt To Muddy The Waters On “Finality” Read More »
In a much anticipated decision, the Supreme Court held today in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339, that alleging a “bare procedural violation” of a federal statute may not be enough to confer a plaintiff with standing to sue. On the other hand, the Court’s 6-2 opinion, authored by Justice Alito, indicated that “the violation
Spokeo “Standing” Ruling Not Cast In Concrete Read More »
Lawrence S. Ebner filed in the U.S. Supreme Court a certiorari-stage amicus curiae brief on behalf of DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar in FCA US LLC v. The Center For Auto Safety, No. 15-1211, urging the Court to establish a nationally uniform “good cause” standard for averting the unsealing of court-filed discovery documents containing confidential business
Every first-year law student learns the taxonomy of federal preemption principles: Although the Supreme Court’s Supremacy Clause cases frequently rely on this preemption lexicon, the Court long ago indicated that these categories are not “rigidly distinct.” English v. Gen. Elec. Co., 496 U.S. 72, 79 n.5 (1990). The Court’s April 19, 2016 opinion in Hughes
Is It Express? Is It Implied? Is It Preempted? Read More »
On April 19, 2016, Larry Ebner, along with Robin Conrad, Averil Rothrock, and M.C. Sungaila, presented a Strafford webinar on amiucs brief strategy, preparation, and procedures in the U.S. Supreme Court, federal courts of appeals, and state appellate courts.
Strategic Use of Amicus Briefs in Appellate Advocacy Read More »
Federal preemption aficionados will find today’s seemingly ho-hum Supreme Court decision in Gobielle v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. to be of considerable interest. The Court held that ERISA expressly preempts a Vermont statute requiring disclosure of ERISA-regulated health care plan payment information. According to Justice Thomas’ concurring opinion, ERISA “contains what may be the most
Can Congress Go Too Far in Preempting State Law ? Read More »
In a 6-3 decision issued on January 20, the Supreme Court affirmed in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, No. 14-857, that federal government contractors are immune from litigation and liability if their work complies with federal directions. The Court rejected, however, unqualified immunity based on the federal government’s sovereign immunity (i.e., “derivative sovereign immunity”). Campbell-Ewald is
Supreme Court Affirms Government Contractors’ Qualified Immunity Read More »
Lawrence S. Ebner filed in the U.S. Supreme Court a certiorari-stage amicus curiae brief on behalf of the Coalition For Government Procurement & the Professional Services Council in AT&T, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Heath, No. 15-363, arguing that nationally uniform enforcement of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) fraud-pleading standard in False Claims Act qui tam
