by Wiggin and Dana LLP | Sep 15, 2019
Greetings, Court fans! Today, we bring you a trio of recent decisions beginning with the letter “M”: Missouri v. McNeely (11-1425), finding that the natural metabolization of alcohol does not present a per se exigent circumstance permitting officers to...
by Wiggin and Dana LLP | Sep 15, 2019
Greetings, Court fans! The Court issued three more decisions this week, marked by their unanimity of opinion: Bowman v. Monsanto (11–796), holding that the patent exhaustion doctrine does not permit a farmer to “copy” patented soybean seeds by planting and...
by Wiggin and Dana LLP | Sep 15, 2019
Greetings, Court fans! The Court released four decisions this week. To break things up, this Update will tackle three, addressing topics ranging from credit for the payment of foreign taxes in PPL Corp. v. Commissioner (12-43), to attorneys’ fees for late-filed...
by Wiggin and Dana LLP | Sep 15, 2019
Greetings, Court fans! Today we bring you City of Arlington, Texas v. FCC (11-1545 and 11-1547), a vigorous reaffirmation of Chevron deference to agencies’ interpretation of ambiguous statutes, including those provisions regarding the scope of the agency’s...
by Wiggin and Dana LLP | Sep 15, 2019
Greetings, Court fans! The Court issued three decisions on Monday to kick off its annual June rush to the finish line. First up is Maryland v. King (12-207), a major criminal procedure decision upholding a state law mandating DNA swabs for individuals arrested for...
