Remove Court Rules Remove North Carolina Remove Statute Remove Tort
article thumbnail

US Supreme Court declines North Carolina appeal in undercover investigations case

JURIST

The US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from North Carolina on Monday over the constitutionality of a state law allowing employers to sue employees working as undercover investigators. ” The denial from the Supreme Court offered no explanation or reasoning. .” The challenged statute, N.C.

article thumbnail

North Carolina Man Killed After GPS Sends Him Over Destroyed Bridge

JonathanTurley

A tragedy in North Carolina could present rather difficult torts questions in a wrongful death case for a grieving family. While I am not a North Carolina lawyer, the state does not appear ideal for plaintiffs in this type of action and the facts of the case could present other difficulties.

Tort 34
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Reschedule Watch: Birthright citizenship and torts to members of the armed forces

SCOTUSBlog

United States , the 1950 Supreme Court case holding that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries sustained by members of the armed forces while on active duty and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed forces. United States. Issues : (1) Whether the doctrine of Chevron U.S.A.,

Tort 98
article thumbnail

Exclusion of HCLA expert based on locality rule affirmed.

Day on Torts

In her initial expert disclosures, plaintiff identified Dr. Steege from Chapel Hill, North Carolina. The trial court ruled that “Dr. Steege did not meet the locality rule outlined in Shipley v. Merely being licensed in Tennessee or a bordering state is not enough if the expert cannot also meet the locality rule.

Tort 59
article thumbnail

Trump’s steel tariffs, UNC affirmative action, and Maine’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate

SCOTUSBlog

In their petition, the challengers argue that the Federal Circuit’s decision contradicts a prior Supreme Court decision that held that Section 232 is not an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to the executive branch because the statute establishes clear preconditions that the president must follow. United States.