网曝吃瓜

Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel: 网曝吃瓜 joined an鈥�amicus brief鈥痑rguing that extensions should be granted in limited circumstances to move cases from state to federal court to eliminate the opportunity for procedural gamesmanship by states and plaintiffs, as the State of Michigan did in this case. The Supreme Court held that the statute does not permit extensions.

Pung v. Isabella County:鈥�狈贵滨叠鈥檚鈥�amicus brief鈥痑rgued that a property owner is entitled to the difference between the property鈥檚 fair market value and the amount of taxes owed. Ultimately, the Supreme Court held that governments must pay the surplus from the sale, meaning the difference between what the property was sold for, even if below fair market value, and the amount of taxes owed.

Flowers Foods, Inc. v. Brock:鈥�The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) exempts certain workers from arbitration if they are 鈥渆ngaged in foreign or interstate commerce.鈥� 网曝吃瓜 joined an鈥�amicus brief鈥痷rging the Supreme Court to include only workers whose job is directly involved in transporting goods across borders. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court extended the exemption to include workers who sell and distribute goods purely within one state, even though they never cross state lines.

Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC:鈥�网曝吃瓜 filed an鈥�amicus brief鈥痗laiming that state tort suits against freight brokers for negligent hiring of a motor carrier are prevented, and allowing lawsuits would impose drastic costs on the shipping industry. The Supreme Court read the statute differently, permitting a patchwork of state-court laws to regulate the nationwide shipping industry instead of a uniform standard.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) v. AT&T, Verizon v. FCC:鈥�These cases concerned whether the FCC鈥檚 enforcement proceedings require a jury trial when the FCC seeks to impose penalties. 狈贵滨叠鈥檚鈥�鈥痑rgued that the Seventh Amendment requires a jury trial, but the Supreme Court held the FCC鈥檚 internal proceedings were sufficient.