Christina Luedtke

United States Supreme Court (6 summaries)

South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc.

States have the authority to require out-of-state retailers with no physical presence within the state to collect and remit a sales tax.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law

Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical

When interpreting a foreign law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1, a federal court must "accord respectful consideration" to a foreign government’s interpretation of the law, but is not bound by this interpretation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. Appling

A single-asset statement qualifies as a "statement respecting the debtor's financial condition" for purposes of 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(2).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Lagos v. United States

Under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act, reimbursement awards to victims are limited only to expenses incurred during government investigations and criminal proceedings, but do not include expenses incurred during private investigations or civil proceedings.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

McCoy v. Louisiana

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to choose the objective of his defense and to insist that his counsel refrain from admitting guilt, even when counsel’s experienced-based view is that confessing guilt offers the defendant the best chance to avoid the death penalty.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Encino Motorcars v. Navarro

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §231(b)(10)(A), automobile dealership service advisors are not entitled to overtime compensation because they are "salesm[e]n ... primarily engaged in ... servicing automobiles."

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

United States Supreme Court Certiorari Granted (8 summaries)

Kisor v. Wilkie

Whether Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co. and Auer v. Robbins, which require the Court to defer to an agency's interpretation of its own regulation, should be overruled.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Flowers v. Mississippi

Whether a prosecutor's history of adjudicated purposeful race discrimination may be dismissed as irrelevant when assessing the credibility of his proffered explanations for peremptory strikes against minority prospective jurors?

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC

Whether, under §365 of the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor-licensor’s “rejection” of a license agreement— which “constitutes a breach of such contract,” 11 U.S.C. §365(g)—terminates rights of the licensee that would survive the licensor’s breach under applicable nonbankruptcy law.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Home Depot U.S.A. Inc. v. Jackson

Whether an original defendant to a class-action claim can remove the class action if it otherwise satisfies the jurisdictional requirements of the Class Action Fairness Act when the class action was originally asserted as a counterclaim against a co-defendant.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert

Whether the Ninth Circuit erred by holding that equitable exceptions apply to mandatory claim-processing rules and excusing a party's failure to timely file a petition for permission to appeal, or a motion for reconsideration, within the Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f) deadline.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Garza v. Idaho

Whether the "presumption of prejudice" recognized in Roe v. Flores-Oretega applies where a criminal defendant instructs his trial counsel to file a notice of appeal but trial counsel decides not to do so because the defendant's plea agreement included an appeal waiver?

Area(s) of Law:
  • Appellate Procedure

United States v. Sims

Whether the generic definition of “burglary” under the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii) includes the burglary of nonpermanent structures or vehicles in which have been adapted for overnight use.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Knick v. Township of Scott

Whether the Supreme Court should reassess the rule set forth in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank which requires property owners to exhaust all state court remedies for land takings claims prior to bringing these claims in federal court.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Property Law

Back to Top