DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: A Discussion of Kisor v. Wilkie
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
E17: Carpenter Decision Builds Up Privacy from #SCOTUS
The dispute at issue in Jack Daniel’s arises from a conflict between the well-known whiskey company and a dog toy company (VIP) regarding VIP’s unauthorized use of Jack Daniel’s trademarks and trade dress in connection with a...more
In its recent opinion in Lindke v. Freed, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed when public officials may be held liable for violating the First Amendment for silencing critics on social media. The Court held that a public...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has established guidelines for determining when a public official’s use of a private social media platform such as Facebook, X or Nextdoor constitutes public speech that cannot be censored. State and...more
On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Lindke v. Freed and a per curiam opinion in O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier addressing when a public official may prevent a person from commenting on the public...more
In its first opportunity to apply the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Jack Daniel’s Properties v. VIP Products LLC, which held that the First Amendment did not protect infringing works that “use [the complainant’s] mark [...more
Thank you for reading the June 2023 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we begin a three-part series that closely examines ways to lose trademark rights; share an article that examines the...more
A federal judge has held that Pennsylvania’s Rule 8.4(g),1 which subjects lawyers to professional discipline for engaging in discriminatory conduct, violates both the free speech clause of the First Amendment and the due...more
Religious Exemption to States' Mandatory Vaccination Statute Not Necessary In Does 1-6 v. Mills, No. 1:21-cv-00242, 2021 WL 4783626 (D. Me. Oct. 13, 2021), the court denied injunctive relief to plaintiff healthcare workers...more
Collins v. Yellen, No. 19-422: The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (“Recovery Act”), 12 U.S.C. §4501 et seq., was passed in response to concerns that Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s financial condition as a result of...more
In three cases this term, the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed the freedom of religious institutions to access government benefits and to make employment decisions....more
On November 25, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Thompson v. Hebdon holding that, in considering whether caps on individual campaign contributions violate the First Amendment, courts must compare the cap to others upheld...more
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently remanded Park Avenue Life Insurance Company v. Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America to a panel of arbitrators for clarification of its award...more
Late last week, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in two cases concerning the constitutionality of political gerrymandering: Rucho v. Common Cause, a case arising out of North Carolina, and Lamone v. Benisek, arising out of...more
On June 27, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Rucho v. Common Cause, No. 18-422, holding that claims of partisan gerrymandering present nonjusticiable political questions that cannot be resolved by the federal courts under...more
A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit has ruled that Seattle violated the First Amendment by banning “disparaging” ads on city buses....more
The Supreme Court has vacated the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision upholding a Berkeley, California ordinance requiring cell phone retailers to warn customers about potential radiofrequency (RF) safety...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States announced the retirement of Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy: Justice Kennedy, nominated by President Ronald Reagan to the Supreme Court, assumed the bench in 1988. ...more
In advance of the midterm elections scheduled for November 6, 2018, many states are preparing for, or have already completed, their primary elections. Meanwhile, voters and state officials in Wisconsin and Maryland have...more
On Monday the Supreme Court avoided deciding, once again, when, if ever, political gerrymandering violates the Constitution. In Gill v. Whitford, the Supreme Court was presented with startling evidence that Wisconsin...more
On June 18, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Gill v. Whitford, No. 16-1161, holding that where voters assert that a state’s legislative districts have been improperly gerrymandered, those voters lack...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in five cases today: California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc., No. 16-373: Lehman Brothers’ collapse led to a number of securities...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued one of its first decisions addressing the relationship between the First Amendment and the Internet. In Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. ___ (June 19, 2017), the Court holds that a...more
Last week, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the United States held that New York General Business Law Section 518, which provides that "[n]o seller in any sales transaction may impose a surcharge on a holder who...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in the following case today: Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, No. 15-1391: Five businesses in New York, petitioners here, wanted to pass along the...more
The conflict minerals case was remanded to the United Stated District Court for the District of Columbia for further proceedings. Judge Jackson ordered the parties to file a joint status report indicating whether any further...more