Constitutional Law Reporter

FEBRUARY 28, 2024

As Justice Gorsuch explained, the Court has found a clear waiver of sovereign immunity in just two situations. The second is when a statute creates a cause of action and explicitly authorizes suit against a government on that claim. government. agency,” §1681a(b), and that applies to the entire Act.

Court Rules 52

Court Rules Court Cause of Action Statute 52

Conflict of Laws

AUGUST 22, 2023

786), the Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court ruled to recognize a German court’s bankruptcy ruling based on the principle of reciprocity. 3, where the Beijing Fourth Intermediate People’s Court ruled to recognize and enforce a trademark judgment of the Korean Supreme Court. 99 Trade Co.

Cause of Action 52

Cause of Action Divorce Court Rules Lawyer 52

Constitutional Law Reporter

APRIL 10, 2024

Supreme Court ruled that public officials may be held liable for their social media activity in certain circumstances. The District Court found that because Freed managed his Facebook page in his private capacity, and because only state action can give rise to liability under §1983, Lindke’s claim failed. In Lindke v.

Court 52

Court Cause of Action Government Court Rules 52

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

DECEMBER 11, 2020

The appellate court also found that even if the trial court erred, the error was harmless because the State proved both acts beyond a reasonable doubt. Hawaii Court Ruled that Commercial Aquarium Fishing Required Environmental Review. Zepeda , No. 80593-2-I (Wash.

Court 54

Court Government Litigation Litigating 54

JonathanTurley

NOVEMBER 27, 2022

The filing is particularly interesting because it focuses not as much on the BDSM or bondage bears being marketed by Balenciaga, but the inclusion the image of a child pornography court ruling. However, the filing sounds like a negligence-based action. The campaign led to an immediate global backlash : Alison H.Centofante.

Court 38

Court Depose Court Decisions Cause of Action 38

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

SEPTEMBER 10, 2021

Under the Endangered Species Act, the court vacated the FWS’s biological opinion because the incidental take statement lacked “the requisite specificity of mitigation measures for the polar bear” and because the take finding for the polar bear was arbitrary and capricious. Northern Plains Resource Council v. Army Corps of Engineers , No.

Litigation 40

Litigation Litigating Court Laws 40