Divided Supreme Court Says States May Allow Receipt Of Ballots After Election Day
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Finding that while federal law governs “when ballots must be cast, state law governs when they must be received,” the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling on June 29 held that a COVID-era Mississippi state law providing that mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day may be received by the registrar within five business days of Election Day and still be valid is not preempted by federal law governing elections.
High Court To Address Entitlement To Fees In Habeas Cases Challenging Detention
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 29 granted an immigration detainee‘s petition for a writ of certiorari asking the court to determine whether a prevailing party to a habeas corpus petition challenging civil immigration detention is entitled to its attorney fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).
Divided High Court Rules Search Occurred In Geofence Warrant Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Concluding that accessing cellphone location evidence from Google under a geofence warrant constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 29 vacated and remanded part of a Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision in a divided ruling that left significant questions for the Fourth Circuit to address.
High Court Allows Firing Of FTC Commissioner, Denies Stay In Federal Reserve Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a pair of opinions issued by a divided U.S. Supreme Court on June 29 concerning two federal officials, the high court majority in the first overruled Humphrey’s Executor v. United States and opined that the president has the power to fire a Federal Trade Commission commissioner at will; in the second opinion, a high court majority declined President Donald J. Trump’s application to stay an injunction keeping a member of the Federal Reserve System Board of Governors in her post while her case challenging her purported firing continues as the majority opined that the Federal Reserve is an independent entity.
High Court Grants Cert For 2nd Circuit Trademark Similarity Analysis Dispute
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 29 order list, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a coffee company’s petition for a writ of certiorari in a trademark infringement dispute with PepsiCo Inc., agreeing to hear the company’s argument that the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals alone considers a trademark’s strength a question of law and not a question of fact. The grant follows an amicus curiae brief from the U.S. government telling the court that certiorari should be denied, even though it believes the Second Circuit’s opinion was erroneous.
8th Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of Hotel Mark Breach Of Contract Dispute
ST. LOUIS — In a June 25 opinion, an Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a Minnesota federal judge’s dismissal of a hotel management company’s claims that a hotel chain company breached a trademark licensing agreement by allowing a competing management company to use certain marks in an exclusive geographic area; the panel agreed with the judge’s conclusion that the competing hotel management company did not use marks covered by the agreement.
10th Circuit Revives Utah’s Challenge To National Monuments Proclamations
DENVER — Ruling that a lower court’s dismissal of a challenge to presidential proclamations related to the boundaries of two national monuments was based on a “flawed view of sovereign immunity’s ultra vires exception,” a divided panel of the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals remanded a long-running case, reviving a dispute over presidential authority under the Antiquities Act in a case that may have implications for hydraulic fracturing.
11th Circuit: Questions Of Distinctiveness Remain In Cheerleading Trademark Fight
ATLANTA — An 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel reversed a Florida federal judge’s grant of summary judgment in defendant-appellee entities’ favor in what the panel called “a spirited battle of trademarks tied to the sport of competitive international cheerleading” because the panel determined that the body of evidence presented by the appellant entity raised questions of fact that could not be resolved at summary judgment regarding genericness and secondary meaning.
7th Circuit: Plaintiff Fails To Show Insurer Is Liable For Telemarketer’s Calls
CHICAGO — The Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a lower federal court’s denial of a plaintiff’s request for class certification in his lawsuit seeking to hold an insurer liable under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act but reversed the court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of the plaintiff, holding that he failed to demonstrate that the insurer is vicariously liable for a telemarketer’s calls under any theory of agency law.
Vice Chancellor Addresses Scope Of Privilege Waiver Concerning Legal Advice
WILMINGTON, Del. — In a June 25 letter opinion in a suit that arose from a failed merger of grocery companies, a Delaware Chancery Court vice chancellor denied a motion to compel “except to the limited extent of providing guidance on the scope of” a stipulated waiver of attorney-client privilege over legal advice.
Insurer Had Reasonable Basis To Contest Coverage For Asbestos Claims, Panel Says
PORTLAND, Ore. — A district court properly dismissed a bad faith suit filed against the insurer of the state of Montana by underlying claimants in asbestos bodily injury suits because the insurer had a reasonable basis to contest coverage for the underlying asbestos claims filed against its insured, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said in an unpublished opinion.