Gurumurthy Kalyanaram on Lawsuits and Policies: a Brief Summary of the Issues At Hand in US Supreme Court’s CertsGranted

Gurumurthy Kalyanaram reports on lawsuits and policies and in this report provides a brief summary of the Issues At Hand in US Supreme Court’s Certs Granted in the first week of October 2014. The various lawsuits and the issues at hand are summarized. This summary is adopted from SCOTUSBLOG.

“Tibble v. Edison International — time limit for suing the manager of an employee benefit plan for faulty decisions on investing plan assets.


Coleman-Bey v. Tollefson — scope of federal law barring a prison inmate from filing a new lawsuit over prison conditions in federal court if three prior lawsuits had failed because they had no merit.

Ohio v. Clark — constitutional limits under the Confrontation Clause on the use in a criminal trial of out-of-court statements made by a child about being sexually or physically abused

Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project — whether federal law against racial bias in home sales and rentals allows lawsuits based on the theory that a policy treats minorities less favorably.

Kerry v. Din — scope of the authority of State Department consular officers to deny visas to individuals seeking to enter the United States — in this case, the non-citizen spouse of a citizen.

Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar — constitutionality under the First Amendment of a state ethical rule barring candidates for state judicial posts to personally solicit campaign funds.

Rodriguez v. United States — justification needed by police officer, after he has pulled over a vehicle for a traffic violation, to go beyond minimally intrusive searching of questioning.

Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center — right of providers of Medicare services to sue under the Constitution for a state’s failure to provide adequate funds for such services.

EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores — scope of the legal duty of a company under the federal law banning workplace discrimination based on a worker or job applicant’s religion

Baker Botts, L.L.P. v. ASARCO L.L.C. – power of a judge in a bankruptcy case to award to a law firm the recovery of professional fees for the time and effort spent in defending an application for such fees.”

Please refer to other articles by Gurumurthy Kalyanaram on Lawsuits and policies on his website:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s