Thursday, January 20, 2011

9/11 Litigation: Cantor Fitzgerald Overclaims for Damages

Judge Hellerstein (SDNY) has issued an opinion stating that under New York law, Cantor Fitzgerald cannot recover economic losses from the loss of its employees.

Further coverage here at the New York Law Journal.

RJE

January 20, 2011 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

SCOTUS Oral Argument Transcript in Astra USA v. Santa Clara County

As covered earlier, the Supreme Court heard oral argument today in Astra USA, Inc. v. Santa Clara County. Here's the oral argument transcript.

--A

January 19, 2011 in Supreme Court Cases | Permalink | Comments (0)

SCOTUS Oral Argument in Astra USA v. Santa Clara County

We covered earlier the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in Astra USA, Inc. v. Santa Clara County (09-1273), which presents the question:

Whether, in the absence of a private right of action to enforce a statute, federal courts have the federal common law authority to confer a private right of action simply because the statutory requirement sought to be enforced is embodied in a contract.

The Court hears oral argument today. Check back for links to the oral argument transcript when it’s available.

Professor Linda Mullenix (Texas) has a preview of the case here.

--A

January 19, 2011 in Supreme Court Cases | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

SCOTUS Oral Argument Transcript in Stern v. Marshall

As covered earlier, the Supreme Court heard oral argument today in Stern v. Marshall. The argument transcript is available here.

--A

January 18, 2011 in Supreme Court Cases | Permalink | Comments (0)

SCOTUS Oral Argument Transcript in Smith v. Bayer Corp.

As covered earlier here, the Supreme Court heard oral argument today in Smith v. Bayer Corp., which presents the questions: 

(1) Whether, under the re-litigation exception of the Anti-Injunction Act, a district court can enjoin parties from seeking class certification in state court under state procedural rules when the district court had previously denied certification of a similar class under federal procedural rules but neither the parties sought to be estopped nor the issues to be presented in state court are identical as those presented to the district court.

(2) Whether a district court that previously denied class certification nonetheless has personal jurisdiction over the absent putative class members such that it may enjoin them from seeking class certification in state court.

The argument transcript is available here.

--A

January 18, 2011 in Class Actions, Supreme Court Cases | Permalink | Comments (0)

SCOTUS Cert. Grants of Interest: Three Cases on Private Causes of Action under the Supremacy Clause

The Supreme Court granted certiorari today in three cases: Maxwell-Jolly v. Independent Living Ctr. (09-958); Maxwell-Jolly v. California Pharmacists Ass’n (09-1158); and Maxwell-Jolly v. Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital(10-283). The Court consolidated the cases and granted certiorari only on the first question presented:

“Whether Medicaid providers may maintain a cause of action under the Supremacy Clause to enforce § 1396a(a)(30)(A) by asserting that the provision preempts a state law that reduces reimbursement rates.”

SCOTUSblog’s casefiles (which contain links to the lower court opinions and the cert-stage briefs) are available here, here, and here.

--A 

January 18, 2011 in Federal Courts, Recent Decisions, Supreme Court Cases | Permalink | Comments (0)

SCOTUS Oral Arguments in Smith v. Bayer; Stern v. Marshall

We covered earlier the Supreme Court’s grants of certiorari in Smith v. Bayer Corp. and Stern v. Marshall. The Court hears oral argument in both cases today. Check back for links to the oral argument transcripts once they’re available.

Smith v. Bayer Corp. (09-1205) presents the questions:

(1) Whether, under the re-litigation exception of the Anti-Injunction Act, a district court can enjoin parties from seeking class certification in state court under state procedural rules when the district court had previously denied certification of a similar class under federal procedural rules but neither the parties sought to be estopped nor the issues to be presented in state court are identical as those presented to the district court.

(2) Whether a district court that previously denied class certification nonetheless has personal jurisdiction over the absent putative class members such that it may enjoin them from seeking class certification in state court.

Stern v. Marshall (No. 10-179) presents the questions:

(1) Whether the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation of 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(C) contravenes congressional intent;

(2) Whether Congress may authorize core jurisdiction over debtors’ compulsory counterclaims to proofs of claim;

(3) Whether the Ninth Circuit contravened Supreme Court precedent and created a circuit split by holding that Congress cannot constitutionally authorize non-Article III bankruptcy judges to enter final judgment on all compulsory counterclaims to proofs of claim.

Here are links to SCOTUSblog’s casefiles, where you can find the briefs in these cases:

Smith v. Bayer Corp.
Stern v. Marshall

Parenthetically, Stern v. Marshall concerns ongoing litigation (which has already generated one SCOTUS decision: Marshall v. Marshall, 547 U.S. 293 (2006)) over the estate of J. Howard Marshall, Jr., the late husband of the late model, actress, and reality TV star Vickie Lynn Marshall (perhaps better known to our readers as Anna Nicole Smith). Anna Nicole Smith's estate is the petitioner in the case being argued today.

--A

January 18, 2011 in Class Actions, Supreme Court Cases | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, January 17, 2011

Eisenberg and Heise on Punitive Damage Awards

Theodore Eisenberg (Cornell Law School) and Michael Heise (Cornell Law School) have posted Judge-Jury Difference in Punitive Damages Awards: Who Listens to the Supreme Court? to SSRN.

Abstract:     
We analyze thousands of trials from a substantial fraction of the nation’s most populous counties as well as a smaller sample of less populous counties. Evidence from four major Civil Justice Survey data sets spanning more than a decade establishes that: (1) compensatory awards are strongly associated with punitive awards and (2) the punitive-compensatory relation has not materially changed over time. But (3) 2005 data suggest, for the first time, systematic differences between judges and juries in the punitive-compensatory relation. Despite claims that the Supreme Court’s State Farm decision changed the punitive-compensatory relation, we present evidence that the 2005 shift is not attributable to the State Farm case or to other possibly relevant likely factors such as the relative flow of personal injury cases to judges and juries, inclusion of 110 small counties in the 2005 data, or changes in the 2005 data coding. The judge-jury difference more likely turns on unobserved factors driving the selection of cases for adjudication before judges and jurors.

RJE

January 17, 2011 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Symeonides on 2010 Choice of Law Cases in American Courts

Dean Symeon Symeonides (Willamette) has posted on SSRN his Twenty-Fourth Annual Survey of American Choice of Law Cases, which will be published in the American Journal of Comparative Law. Here’s the abstract:

This is the Twenty-Fourth Annual Survey of American Choice-of-Law Cases. It is written at the request of the Association of American Law Schools Section on Conflict of Laws, and is intended as a service to fellow teachers and students of conflicts law, both within and outside the United States.

The Survey covers cases decided by American state and federal appellate courts from January 1 to December 31, 2010. Of the 1,271 appellate conflicts cases decided during this period, the Survey focuses on those cases that may contribute something new to the development or understanding of conflicts law - and, particularly, choice of law.

This has been an unusually rich year in choice-of-law developments. Some of the highlights include: Four decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court (on extraterritoriality, sovereign immunity, class actions, and the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction, respectively), and several circuit court decisions on the extraterritorial reach of federal laws; a constitutional amendment in Oklahoma purporting to prohibit its courts from using international law, foreign law, and Sharia law; three cases involving efforts to recover art lost during the Nazi era and also implicating federal affairs questions; several cases affirming class certification in consumer protection cases and one case holding that the application of one state's consumer credit law to soliciting out-of-state lenders was unconstitutional under the dormant Commerce Clause; a major decision by the California Supreme Court refining its comparative impairment approach and a richer than usual assortment of cases involving tort, contract, product liability and insurance conflicts, as well as domestic relations conflicts; and several opinions written by Judge Posner in his always interesting style, including one questioning the value of using foreign-law experts.

--A 

January 17, 2011 in Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)