Other Decisions: Decided
Decided - The FindLaw Noteworthy Decisions and Settlements Blog

Recently in Other Category

Vitaminwater has settled a class action lawsuit over claims that its labeling and marketing were deceptive and misleading.

The class action includes Vitaminwater consumers in Florida, Illinois, Missouri, Ohio, and the Virgin Islands who purchased the product since 2003. As of Tuesday, the Washington Examiner reported that the settlement was still pending approval in a New York federal court. If approved, the settlement will prohibit Vitaminwater from making claims like "vitamins + water -- what's in your hand."

What was the case against Vitaminwater, and how will its marketing be changed by this settlement?

A federal appellate court has upheld Florida's controversial "Docs v. Glocks" law, barring doctors from asking patients about gun ownership.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a prior decision by a Florida federal district court, declaring the law to be a "legitimate regulation" of doctors' professional conduct in the state, reports Reuters. Critics worry that this law chills physicians' free speech rights with regard to firearms, placing their licenses on the line if they broach the subject of guns.

It appears "Glocks" won over "Docs," but why did the appeals court side with gun owners?

A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the use of Obamacare subsidies in both state- and federally run healthcare exchanges.

Tuesday's unanimous ruling in King v. Burwell flatly contradicts an earlier ruling (hours earlier) by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which denied the use of Obamacare tax credits to anyone who enrolled via a federally created exchange. USA Today reports that this circuit split may lead to a "Supreme Court showdown."

Why did the 4th Circuit allow Obamacare subsidies for all healthcare exchanges, when the D.C. Circuit limited them?

A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Obamacare subsidies are only authorized for eligible participants in "State"-established healthcare exchanges, and not for participants in the federally established exchange.

The ruling arises from an IRS interpretation of the laws underpinning Obamacare, specifically allowing taxpayers to take advantage of premium tax credits regardless of whether a state or federal entity created the insurance marketplace. Law professor Jonathan Adler writes for The Volokh Conspiracy that he believes this ruling is truer to the text of the law, though it may not mean the healthcare system many reformers had hoped for.

Why did the D.C. Circuit rule against Obamacare subsidies for participants in federally created marketplaces?

If you bought a computer, video game console, or other electronic device between 1998 and 2002, chances are you're eligible to get at least $10 -- and maybe more -- just by filling out a form.

As part of a price-fixing lawsuit settlement, manufacturers of DRAM -- aka Dynamic Random Access Memory, a type of memory used in most computers -- have agreed to provide rebates to consumers who purchased products containing DRAM during the years in question, with no documentation required on your part.

Fill out the form; acquire currency. Can it really be that simple?

The U.S. Supreme Court's 2013 Term was full of surprises both in the public and private sectors. After the High Court's final opinions were released Monday, we had an opportunity to revisit some of this session's biggest cases.

Here are our picks for the Top 10 Supreme Court decisions from the 2013 Term, which began back in October:

Red-light camera tickets have been dealt a blow in Florida's Supreme Court, after a ruling that some drivers may qualify for refunds for tickets issued before a 2010 state law.

Florida's High Court's ruling focused on two cities in the Sunshine State where red-light programs were established from 2008 to 2010, Reuters reports. These cities' programs for red-light tickets were struck down because they clashed with state law, entitling some residents to refunds.

Which drivers may be owed a refund, and is this another legal blow for red-light cameras?

A federal gun law on "straw purchases" has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, preventing buyers from purchasing a gun just to transfer it to someone else.

In a 5-4 decision, the High Court determined that even if the ultimate recipient of the firearm is legally permitted to own a gun, federal laws intended to prevent sham transactions known as "straw purchases" are still valid, reports The Associated Press.

Can gun buyers still purchase guns as gifts without violating federal law?

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that prosecutors can't use a chemical weapons treaty to convict a Pennsylvania woman who attacked her husband's mistress.

Carol Anne Bond was convicted under a federal law which enforces an international treaty prohibiting chemical weapons -- for a crime that the Supreme Court grouped among "the simplest of assaults." Bond had attempted to spread chemicals on her husband's lover's car, door knob, and mailbox in a mostly unsuccessful ploy to give the woman a rash.

So why did the Supreme Court feel Bond couldn't be prosecuted under the chemical weapons statutes?

"Company Doe's" secrets could soon be revealed after a federal appeals court panel determined the corporation cannot keep product-safety litigation secret to protect its image.

The case involved the death of an infant, and the corporation wished to be only known as "Company Doe" in court papers to maintain confidentiality. But a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that sealing court records in this case violated the public's constitutional rights to "obtain access to civil proceedings," Reuters reports.

So when will "Company Doe" and its secrets be revealed? It's still not quite clear.