Supreme Court Injury and Tort Law News - U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Supreme Court - The FindLaw U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Summaries Blog

Recently in Injury and Tort Law Category

Habeas corpus is all but dead, gun rights mean nothing (especially for 18 to 21-year-olds), the Feds will break up your neighborhood poker game, and the Supreme Court's rulings in the Washing Machine Cases were ignored completely.

Yes, these are all exaggerations of the effects of the most notable of today's many denials, found amongst a 46-page orders list. But in fact, the Court did not grant any new cases. Here are the ones that we were keeping an eye on:

It's been an unusually busy day on First Street, with the court granting certiorari in two cases after yesterday's conference, and with a minor surprise in the ongoing nationwide litigation over Aereo, a service that streams local broadcast channels over the internet to subscribers.

The two new cases, Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoefer and Loughrin v. United States both involve banks, but that's where the similarities end. The former case asks whether a bank has a fiduciary duty to divest stock in itself from employees' stock plans when it knows or should know that it is engaging in risky (subprime lending) business practices. In the latter case, the Court will decide whether the government has to prove that a defendant who passed stolen checks at Target had the intent to defraud the bank or financial institution specifically.

Much like women who are online dating receive far more suitors than they can handle, the Supreme Court gets asked for a date far more often than it can (or will) accept. As a result, the grant rate for certiorari is a bit less than 1 percent.

With that in mind, the Monday orders list is usually a sad, yet uneventful waiting room full of spurned parties. Today? It was far from a riot, but there were a few notable cases, including the court's denial of a writ of mandamus in an NSA surveillance case and this, a half-hearted benchslap by Justice Alito.

Busy Monday.

This morning, the court released an orders list with quite a few surprises, including the Court's response to the Oklahoma Supreme Court's certified question answers in the medical abortion (RU-486 "off-label") dispute, a per curium reversal of a Ninth Circuit decision (the fun starts early, apparently), and finally, with a Schwarzenegger-esque, "we'll be back" sort-of-statement, Chief Justice Roberts announced the denial of certiorari in Mark v. Lane, a Facebook class-action settlement case.

Interested in the short version, rather than the court's 27-page orders list? Read on:

Though the Court granted certiorari in eight cases last week, the first official day of business is today, and the court rung in the new term with a lengthy 94-page orders list, most of which were denials.

Though the court's jurisdiction is discretionary, there are always a few surprises on the denials sheet, as well as a few that we wish they would've taken up. Here are some of those rejected petitions:

'Presumption Against Extraterritoriality' Bars Alien Tort Claim

A group of Nigerian plaintiffs claim that Royal Dutch Petroleum Company and Shell Transport and Trading Company -- which you probably know as Shell Oil -- aided and abetted the Nigerian government in committing human rights abuses against them. Those abuses included beating, raping, and arresting people, and destroying or looting property.

The plaintiffs sued the oil company in the U.S. under the Alien Tort Statute in 2002. Eleven years later, they have officially lost their case because the presumption against extraterritoriality applies to claims under the ATS, and the statute doesn't rebut that presumption.

SCOTUS Reverses Third Circuit in Comcast, Millbrook

The Supreme Court decided this week that the Third Circuit Court of Appeals is all kinds of wrong.

Wednesday, the Court issued two opinions reversing earlier Third Circuit rulings: Millbrook v. U.S. and Comcast Corp et al v. Behrend.

Are Pay-for-Delay Deals Anti-Competitive?

The Federal Trade Commission believes that paying a prospective rival to stay out of a competition is the very definition of anti-competitive behavior, but the federal courts are split on the matter, Reuters reports.

Monday, the Supreme Court will take a stab at resolving whether brand and generic drug manufacturers should be allowed to enter into mutually-beneficial pay-for-delay arrangements.

Dynamic Duo: SCOTUS Decides Wos, Decker

There are a few Supreme Court cases each term that become part of the collective consciousness: Last year, there were the healthcare and immigration cases. This year, there are the Voting Rights Act, same-sex marriage, and affirmative action cases.

These are the issues that people get excited about. These are the topics that people discuss around the dinner table. These are the captions that law geeks write on their legal pads in swirly letters and circle with hearts.

Vet Can Sue Government for Battery After Botched Surgery

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) waives the government’s sovereign immunity from tort suits, but certain intentional torts — including battery — are excluded from the waiver.

Monday, however, the Supreme Court ruled that the Gonzalez Act abrogates the FTCA’s intentional tort exception and permits a medical battery suit against the U.S.