Recent News About U.S. Supreme Court
View More
-
The petition asserts the California courts have issued 'nonsensical' rulings, finding that under the SCOTUS' Viking River decision, California workers who are blocked from suing their employers by arbitration clauses can still sue their employers under California's PAGA law on behalf of coworkers
-
A recent federal appellate ruling from the Ninth Circuit means San Francisco won’t be able to clear homeless encampments from city streets, unless the U.S. Supreme Court overturns another case involving homeless encampments.
-
A new ballot measure wants to cut back on NIMBY lawsuits brought by special interests that work against housing production and potential homeowners.
-
As Sacramento has seen a rise in homelessness – up 67 percent since 2019 – the county’s chief prosecutor, Thien Ho, is suing the city over failure to enforce a number of policies that are meant to protect the unhoused and preserve public health and safety.
-
Gov. Gavin Newsom among numerous government officials filing briefs in homeless encampment case, urging review by U.S. Supreme Court of the Grant's Pass decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which declared city rules against camping in parks, on streets, violates homeless people's rights
-
In what’s anticipated to mean more angst for California businesses, Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed a new law, SB 365, that allows court cases to continue against employers while arbitration appeals are still pending.
-
Ninth Circuit ruling holds lawsuits under state laws are not always preempted by federal laws prohibiting the same conduct
-
With the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to uphold a California law that requires different restrictions in pork processing, it’s raising questions about how it aligns with the federal Commerce Clause that prevents a single state from unduly burdening how others do business.
-
Dissenting justices warned California should now expect other states to respond in kind, following California's "blueprint" to use state laws and market power to bypass Congress and bend the rest of the country to the will of voters in just one or a handful of states
-
WASHINGTON (Legal Newsline) - The U.S. Supreme Court won't reignite coffee-causes-cancer lawsuits in California, declining to hear an appeal on April 17.
-
Johnson & Johnson has no further avenues for challenging a $344 million judgment in California after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the case, which J&J and other said was based upon an unconstitutionally vague consumer-protection status.
-
An upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision in a case originating in Northern California will determine whether lawsuit proceedings must stop when a party appeals a motion denying arbitration.
-
A federal appeals court declared the way that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is funded to be unconstitutional, because it essentially allows the federal agency to answer only to itself, and not elected lawmakers
-
The state of California is expected to reinstate enforcement of AB5 on independent truck drivers after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to grant certiorari in California Trucking Association v. Bonta, raising concerns about impacts on the supply chain and rising costs here and nationwide.
-
The U.S. Supreme Court in a near-unanimous decision in Viking v. Moriana has agreed that claims brought under the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) can be compelled to arbitration.
-
As the U.S. Supreme Court considers its decision in Viking v. Moriana, a case involving the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), it’s raising questions about what the future of the controversial law will look like.
-
With gas prices now above $6 in California and continuing to rise, a new Pacific Research Institute brief has found that all the litigation over greenhouse gas emissions is hurting consumers and disincentivizing robust innovation in the energy sector.
-
Christine Morgan among Daily Journal's 2022 ‘Top IP Lawyers’ in California.
-
Oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court took place late last month in Viking v. Moriana, a case that questions whether California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) is exempt from the rules of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).
-
A new amicus brief filed with U.S. Supreme Court in Viking v. Moriana argues that California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) is not exempt from the rules of the Federal Arbitration Act.
