Case Summaries
Contracts
Tax Law
Commercial Law
International Law
Contracts
[09/24]
US v. Starnes
District court's sentence and conviction of defendants for, inter alia, knowingly violating EPA work practice standards for the handling and disposal of regulated asbestos-containing material, is affirmed where: 1) evidence supports a finding that defendant was an operator of the project within the meaning of the Clean Air Act; 2) the evidence was sufficient to establish falsity, federal-government jurisdiction, and the necessary elements of an 18 U.S.C. section 1001(a) violation; and 3) defendants' various challenges to the district court's determination of their respective sentences is rejected.
[09/24]
In re: Pharm. Benefit Managers Antitrust Litig.
In one of six similar antitrust actions challenging the practices of prescription benefits managers, that was transferred by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation for coordinated proceedings, a transferee judge's order vacating the transferor judge's order compelling arbitration is vacated and remanded with instructions to reinstate the order compelling arbitration as the vacatur order violated the law of the case doctrine.
[09/24]
Kara Tech., Inc. v. Stamps.com, Inc.
In a patent infringement and breach of nondisclosure agreement (NDA), involving patents directed toward apparatuses and methods of creating and verifying authenticity of documents such as postage, district court's judgment is vacated in part, reversed in part, and remanded where: 1) the judgment of noninfringement is vacated as the district court erred in construing the claims; and 2) district court's grant of summary judgment on the breach of contract claim is reversed as there are material issues of fact in dispute regarding breach of the NDA due to misuse of the confidential information.
More...
Tax Law
[09/23]
US v. Bragg
Defendant's sentence for filing false tax returns is vacated where the district court failed to adequately explain the grounds for the sentence because: 1) the record was not clear that defendant's incarceration would harm his father's business; 2) the district court understated the severity of the offense; and 3) the district court improperly relied on prompt satisfaction of a substantial monetary sanction to impose a non-custodial sentence.
[09/17]
Hoosier Energy Rural Elec. Coop., Inc. v. John Hancock Life Ins. Co.
In a dispute arising from a transaction between a co-op, insurer and a surety involving a leveraged lease of a power station over a 63-year period, district court's grant of temporary injunction is affirmed as it did not err in concluding that co-op's claim was sufficient for the limited purpose of the temporary injunction.
[09/17]
Desmet v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
In a consolidated appeal of orders of the United States Tax Court assessing income deficiencies against former business partners engaged in an abusive tax shelter known as "Son-of-Boss", the tax court had jurisdiction over the deficiency proceedings but the case is remanded for consideration of whether certain components of the deficiencies were time-barred.
More...
Commercial Law
[09/24]
PAM, S.P.A. v. US
United States Court of International Trade's (CIT) final judgment concerning pasta imported into the United States by an Italian producer and exporter of pasta, arising from a 1996 Commerce antidumping order, is affirmed as the adverse-facts-available (AFA) 45.49% margin assessed against plaintiff is supported by substantial evidence.
[09/21]
APL Co. Pte. Ltd. v. UK Aerosols Ltd.
In an action based on defendants' shipping of defective products, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) defendants were not "shippers" entitled to the protection of section 1304(3) of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA); and 2) the bill of lading at issue did not violate COGSA. However, the district court's denial of plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees is reversed where plaintiff did not waive the right to contend that Singapore law governed the bill of lading.
[09/18]
In re: Ames Dept. Stores, Inc.
In an appeal from the district court's order affirming a bankruptcy court's order applying section 502(d) of the Bankruptcy Code to disallow a request for payment of administrative expenses until debtor's predecessor in interest returned a preferential transfer, the order is vacated where section 502(d) does not bar allowance of administrative expenses within the scope of section 503(b).
More...
International Law
[09/21]
APL Co. Pte. Ltd. v. UK Aerosols Ltd.
In an action based on defendants' shipping of defective products, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) defendants were not "shippers" entitled to the protection of section 1304(3) of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA); and 2) the bill of lading at issue did not violate COGSA. However, the district court's denial of plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees is reversed where plaintiff did not waive the right to contend that Singapore law governed the bill of lading.
[09/09]
Khan v. Holder
In a petition for review of the BIA's decision denying petitioner's application for asylum and withholding of removal, the petition is denied where the Immigration Judge properly applied the terrorism bar in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) because the definition of "terrorist activity" under the INA does not provide an exception for armed resistance against military targets that is permitted under the international law of armed conflict.
[09/08]
Cassirer v. Kingdom of Spain
In an action under international law seeking to recover a painting on display at a Spanish museum that was allegedly stolen by Nazis during World War II, defendants' appeal from a denial of their motions to dismiss is dismissed in part, where there was no final judgment on the issues of personal jurisdiction, standing, and the existence of a justiciable case or controversy. However, the district court's order is vacated in part where the expropriation exception of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act applied when the foreign state (against whom a claim is made) was not the entity that expropriated the property in violation of international law.
More...
|
