Cause of Action Laws Legal Tort 
JURIST
JUNE 20, 2021
The US Supreme Court on Thursday reversed a ruling that allowed several individuals to sue food corporations Nestlé USA and Cargill over child slavery claims, limiting corporate liability under the Alien Tort Statute. The unnamed plaintiffs brought their cases forward under the Alien Tort Statute. In Jesner v.
At the Lectern
JULY 6, 2023
In other words, there’s no legal exposure for employee family member virus exposure. ” “[E]xclusivity provisions bar a third party claim only when proof of an employee’s injury is required as an element of the cause of action,” the court says.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Conflict of Laws
OCTOBER 29, 2021
In FS Cairo (Nile Plaza) LLC v Lady Brownlie [2021] UKSC 45 (“ Brownlie II ”), the Supreme Court held as a matter of ratio by a 4:1 majority that consequential loss satisfies the ‘tort gateway’ in Practice Direction (“ PD ”) 6B, para. Economic torts? Background. PD 6B, para. Three main reasons were given. Three main reasons were given.
Day on Torts
NOVEMBER 7, 2022
Here, the issue was whether the pre-suit notice letter was sent by plaintiff “more than one year after the cause of action accrued and the one-year statute of limitations period began to run.”. Note: Chapter 50, Section 3 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in Tennessee Tort Law has been updated to include this decision.
SCOTUSBlog
JUNE 8, 2023
1983 and allowing private damages actions to enforce the Federal Nursing Home Reform Act of 1987. FNHRA, a law enacted under Congress’s spending clause powers, requires nursing facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid to “protect and promote the rights of each resident” as a condition of receiving funds.
Day on Torts
DECEMBER 30, 2020
One year and 21 days after the accident, the plaintiff filed this case under Tennessee’s Governmental Tort Liability Act against the county that employed the firefighter, the fire department, and the estate of the firefighter, who was also killed in the accident. Defendants moved to dismiss based on the statute of limitations.
LettersBlogatory
AUGUST 23, 2021
They argued that they had a right of action under 28 U.S.C. 1605(a)(3), which creates an exception to foreign sovereign immunity when the case concerns “rights in property taken in violation of international law.” Their claim did not arise under the ATS or under state law, but under the FSIA itself.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
249 
Let's personalize your content