The U.S. Supreme Court may not consider same-sex marriage this term, but it will address a number of important cases impacting the business community. Reuters reports that, at last tally, more than half the 48 cases on the Court’s docket are business-related, including seven labor and employment disputes, three antitrust cases, and three tax cases.
As we have previously discussed on this blog, the Roberts Court has been relatively business friendly over the past several years, with key victories last term including the invalidation of the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate as it applies to closely held corporations and the determination that employers do not have to pay unionized employees for time spent changing in and out of protective gear.
Of course, the trend is not guaranteed to continue. Below are several key business cases that we will be watching over the 2014-2015 Term:
Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz: The Court will delve back into U.S. patent law with a case involving Teva Pharmaceuticals’ successful Copaxone drug, which is used to treat multiple sclerosis. The specific question before the justices is whether a district court’s factual finding in support of its construction of a patent claim term may be reviewed de novo, as the Federal Circuit requires, or only for clear error, as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) requires.
Young v. UPS: Women’s health issues will reclaim the spotlight when the justices address what types of accommodations employers must make for pregnant workers. As detailed in a prior post, the Court has specifically been asked to determine whether, and in what circumstances, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, requires an employer that provides work accommodations to non-pregnant employees with work limitations to provide work accommodations to pregnant employees who are “similar in their ability or inability to work.” While the Fourth Circuit found that UPS properly denied a lifting accommodation requested by a pregnant worker, the decision conflicts with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s latest pregnancy discrimination guidance.
Omnicare Inc. v. Laborers District Council: In the much-anticipated securities litigation case, the Court will decide the standard for pleading a claim under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, which authorizes a cause of action for investors who have acquired securities under a registration statement that was materially misleading or omitted material information. The specific issue before the justices is whether a plaintiff may plead that a statement of opinion was “untrue” merely by alleging that the opinion itself was objectively wrong or must the plaintiff also allege that the statement was subjectively false – requiring allegations that the speaker’s actual opinion was different from the one expressed.
The Supreme Court will also likely continue to add cases to the docket that may be of interest to the business community. When announced, many of the decisions will be discussed in-depth on this blog, as well as the Scarinci Hollenbeck Constitutional Law Reporter. Please check back here for an in-depth preview of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch, which involves when employers can be held liable for religious discrimination.
If you have any questions about the cases pending before the Supreme Court or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
U.S. Supreme Court Adds to Growing Business Docket
Author: Robert E. Levy
The U.S. Supreme Court may not consider same-sex marriage this term, but it will address a number of important cases impacting the business community. Reuters reports that, at last tally, more than half the 48 cases on the Court’s docket are business-related, including seven labor and employment disputes, three antitrust cases, and three tax cases.
As we have previously discussed on this blog, the Roberts Court has been relatively business friendly over the past several years, with key victories last term including the invalidation of the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate as it applies to closely held corporations and the determination that employers do not have to pay unionized employees for time spent changing in and out of protective gear.
Of course, the trend is not guaranteed to continue. Below are several key business cases that we will be watching over the 2014-2015 Term:
Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz: The Court will delve back into U.S. patent law with a case involving Teva Pharmaceuticals’ successful Copaxone drug, which is used to treat multiple sclerosis. The specific question before the justices is whether a district court’s factual finding in support of its construction of a patent claim term may be reviewed de novo, as the Federal Circuit requires, or only for clear error, as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) requires.
Young v. UPS: Women’s health issues will reclaim the spotlight when the justices address what types of accommodations employers must make for pregnant workers. As detailed in a prior post, the Court has specifically been asked to determine whether, and in what circumstances, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, requires an employer that provides work accommodations to non-pregnant employees with work limitations to provide work accommodations to pregnant employees who are “similar in their ability or inability to work.” While the Fourth Circuit found that UPS properly denied a lifting accommodation requested by a pregnant worker, the decision conflicts with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s latest pregnancy discrimination guidance.
Omnicare Inc. v. Laborers District Council: In the much-anticipated securities litigation case, the Court will decide the standard for pleading a claim under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, which authorizes a cause of action for investors who have acquired securities under a registration statement that was materially misleading or omitted material information. The specific issue before the justices is whether a plaintiff may plead that a statement of opinion was “untrue” merely by alleging that the opinion itself was objectively wrong or must the plaintiff also allege that the statement was subjectively false – requiring allegations that the speaker’s actual opinion was different from the one expressed.
The Supreme Court will also likely continue to add cases to the docket that may be of interest to the business community. When announced, many of the decisions will be discussed in-depth on this blog, as well as the Scarinci Hollenbeck Constitutional Law Reporter. Please check back here for an in-depth preview of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch, which involves when employers can be held liable for religious discrimination.
If you have any questions about the cases pending before the Supreme Court or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
