HowAppealing
DECEMBER 1, 2023
“Parsing Invalidating Statutes (Part II)”: John F. ” The post begins, “In a prior post, I argued that the precise language used in state statutes purporting to invalidate choice-of-law clauses and forum selection clauses can have outsized effects in litigation.
FDA Law Blog
MAY 30, 2024
Carole Johnson (consolidated cases), the Court found that the conditions set by Novartis and United Therapeutics on covered entities did not violate the 340B statute, although more restrictive conditions could violate the law. A number of drug companies sued to enjoin enforcement. In affirming the District Court’s ruling, the D.C.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
FDA Law Blog
MARCH 24, 2024
By Faraz Siddiqui — As drug manufacturers battle the Health Resources and Services Administration (“HRSA”) in federal courts over the role of 340B contract pharmacies, an Eighth Circuit decision to uphold a 2021 Arkansas law may render those cases inconsequential in that state. Code Ann. § 23-92-604(c)(1), (2) (Act 1103).
SCOTUSBlog
FEBRUARY 21, 2024
The argument revealed a bench deeply skeptical of the uncertainty maritime insurance contracts would face under a lower-court decision limiting the enforcement of choice-of-law clauses in those contracts. Often, when the parties are from different jurisdictions, they select a neutral forum and its law.
SCOTUSBlog
OCTOBER 6, 2023
Perhaps some of the justices will even enjoy a return to their law-school days, as they consider whether state or federal law should govern the enforceability of maritime choice-of-law clauses. The question here is whether the rules for enforcing the choice-of-law clause in a maritime contract fall within one of those gaps.
SCOTUSBlog
OCTOBER 10, 2023
The question – whether state or federal law should govern the enforceability of maritime choice-of-law clauses – at first seems technical. Although neither party to the contract is from New York, the insurance contract selected New York law, as these contracts typically do. Fireman’s Insurance Co. ,
JURIST
MAY 26, 2021
A US federal judge ruled Monday that Georgia’s anti-BDS law, which prohibits state contractors from boycotting Israel, violates the First Amendment and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. ” The post Federal judge finds Georgia anti-BDS law unconstitutional appeared first on JURIST - News - Legal News & Commentary.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
100 
Let's personalize your content