Jennings v. Rodriguez
Aliens detained under 8 U.S.C. §§1225(b)(1),(2) and 8 U.S.C. §1226(a) do not have the right to periodic bond hearings.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Merit Management Group, LP v. FTI Consulting, Inc.
To determine whether an entity is included under the “safe harbor exception” in the bankruptcy code, 11 U.S.C. §546, the court must view financial transaction as a whole and not merely as “component parts.”
Area(s) of Law:- Bankruptcy Law
Patchak v. Zinke
Congress does not violate Article III when it enacts a new law directing the federal courts to dismiss certain suits, even when the law retroactively effects pending litigation.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Class v. United States
By pleading guilty, a federal criminal defendant does not waive the right to directly appeal the constitutionality of the statute under which they were convicted.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Digital Realty Trust, Inc. v. Somers
The Dodd-Frank Act’s anti-retaliation provision allowing an award to whistleblowers does not extend to those reporters who have not provided information directly to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Murphy v. Smith
Under 42 U.S.C. §1997e(d)(2), a district court must use as much of a prisoner’s judgment as necessary, without exceeding 25%, to discharge an award of attorney’s fees.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
Rubin, et al., v. Islamic Republic of Iran, et al.
Section 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act identifies property that will be available for attachment and execution in satisfaction of § 1605(A) judgments, but it does not in itself divest that property of foreign sovereign immunity.
Area(s) of Law:- Sovereign Immunity
CNH Industrial N.V. v. Jack Reese
A contract is not ambiguous unless it is subject to more than one reasonable interpretation, and the Yard-Man inferences cannot generate a reasonable interpretation because they are not “ordinary principles of contract law.”
Area(s) of Law:- Contract Law