article thumbnail

Petitions of the week: Four petitions that test the limits on lawsuits against the government

SCOTUSBlog

The district court ruled that Ex parte Young applied because Congress’ approval of the compact made it binding federal law. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit disagreed and barred the suit, seeing the compact as more akin to an agreement that New Jersey could — and did — renounce. In Polk County, Wisconsin v.

article thumbnail

Rittenhouse 2.0: Threats of New Litigation Fly in the Aftermath of Rittenhouse Verdict

JonathanTurley

It is not allowed to simply ignore the law to seek its own criminal justice rules. The Rittenhouse jury faithfully applied the Wisconsin law and came to a well-founded verdict of acquittal. However, he was then found guilty in a torts lawsuit brought by the Goldman family and ordered to pay $33.5 That presents a novel question.

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

Guest Post: Third-Party Litigation Funding: Disclosure to Courts, Congress, and the Executive

Patently O

ten years ago—at least in part due to longstanding common law rules on champerty, maintenance, [3] and patent law’s relative high risk—today third-party litigation funding (TPLF) [4] undergirds about 30% of all patent litigation, by conservative estimates. [5] 6N; 2017 Wisconsin Act 235, § 12, Wis. 24] At the Federal level, the U.S.

article thumbnail

June 2021 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The court denied, however, Connecticut’s motion for costs and fees, noting that several issues raised by Exxon were novel in the Second Circuit and that many relevant portions of district court rulings in other circuits had not been subject to appellate review until the Supreme Court’s recent decision in the Baltimore case.

Court 42
article thumbnail

November 2017 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

In addition, the court found that the company had failed to show that the alleged RICO violations proximately caused injury to its business or property. The court also dismissed defamation and related state tort claims. On October 4 , the federal district court for the Northern District of California vacated the U.S.

Court 40