Megan Perry

United States Supreme Court (10 summaries)

Marx v. General Revenue Corp.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1)—which allows a court to award costs to a prevailing party "[u]nless a federal statute . . . provides otherwise"—is not displaced by the “bad faith” provision of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because the provision is not "contrary" to the Rule.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Miller v. Alabama

A mandatory life sentence without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd. v. Novo Nordisk A/S

The Hatch-Waxman Act's counterclaim provision allows generic drug manufacturers to seek an FDA order requiring changes by the patent holder both to approved uses of the drug and to corrections of the patent's scope.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Zivotofsky v. Clinton

The district court's determination of whether a Jerusalem-born US citizen may choose to have Israel listed as his place of birth on his passport is not barred by political question doctrine.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Sackett v. EPA

An individual may file suit under the Administrative Procedure Act to challenge a compliance order issued by the EPA under the Clean Water Act because the compliance order is a final agency action and the Clean Water Act does not preclude judicial review.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Miller v. Alabama

Whether a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole violates the Eight and Fourteenth Amendments when the defendant was fourteen years old at the time of the crime.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Mohamad v. Palestinian Authority

Whether the Torture Victim Protection Act includes corporations or organizations as possible defendants.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tort Law

Sackett v. EPA

Whether the Clean Water Act permits judicial review of compliance orders issued by the Environmental Protection Agency prior to enforcement action, and if not, if review preclusion is a violation of the Due Process Clause.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Caraco v. Novo Nordisk

Whether the provision in the Hatch-Waxman Act allowing generic drug manufacturers to “counterclaim” and seek an FDA order requiring changes by the patent holder applies to (1) approved methods of use of the drug and (2) corrections to the patent’s scope.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Zivotofsky v. Clinton

(1) Whether a suit requiring a federal court to order the State Department to adhere to a Congressional statute requiring official government documents identify Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is a justiciable issue, (2) Whether Section 214 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003, impermissibly infringes the President's power to recognize foreign sovereigns.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

United States Supreme Court Certiorari Granted (7 summaries)

United States v. Windsor

Whether section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) violates the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by defining marriage as "only a legal union between one man and one woman."

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

PPL Corp. v. CIR

Whether courts should apply a formalistic or substance-based approach when determining the creditability of foreign tax credits.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law

Genesis HealthCare Corp. v. Symczyk

Whether Article III’s Case or Controversy Clause moots an action when the plaintiff receives an offer that satisfies all of plaintiff's claims.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Marx v. General Revenue Corp.

Whether (1) a facsimile from a debt collection agency to a third party regarding a consumer's employment information constitutes a communication and is therefore in violation of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) and (2) the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permitting award of costs to a prevailing party is superseded by the cost provision of the FDCPA.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Fisher v. University of Texas

Whether including race as a factor in determining undergraduate admissions was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Kloeckner v. Solis

Whether the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has sole subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal from a ruling by the Merit Systems Protection Board when the case includes both discrimination and unlawful termination claims.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Armour v. Indianapolis

Whether the City of Indianapolis violated the 14th Amendment by forgiving outstanding assessments for some property owners while not offering refunds for others who had paid in full.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law