Pacific Fertility Center in San Francisco, California, faces a federal class-action lawsuit after one of its storage tanks lost liquid nitrogen for a short time in early March of 2018, which may have caused the loss of some frozen eggs and embryos. The lead plaintiff, identified only as S.M., alleges gross negligence on the part of Pacific Fertility Center in the maintenance, inspection, and monitoring of the malfunctioned storage freezer, which resulted in the loss of S.M.'s eggs. Read More.
Recently Featured Dockets
M. v. Pacific Fertility Center et al (filed 3/13/18)
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
A woman, identified only as S.M., whose frozen eggs were stored at the Pacific Fertility Center has filed a class-action lawsuit against the company in response to reports of a freezer malfunction in early March that caused damage to some or all of the tissue stored there. This is the second incidence of a freezer malfunction at a storage facility (the first being at University Hospitals in Cleveland, Ohio), but the two are unrelated.
Carter v. Rudinplay, Inc. (filed 3/13/18)
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama
The estate of acclaimed writer Harper Lee is suing screenwriter Aaron Sorkin over his adaptation of Lee's novel "To Kill a Mockingbird." The complaint alleges that Sorkin's portrayal of Atticus Finch, the lawyer who represents a black man unjustly accused of rape, makes Finch out to be a naïve apologist for the racial status quo, a depiction Lee's estate argues conflicts with his purely heroic image in the novel.
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California v. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) (filed 3/12/18)
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit against the federal Transportation Security Administration under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), seeking records explaining why the TSA has imposed stricter search policies of electronics on domestic flights. The lawsuit points out that federal agencies have released information about changed policies with respect to searches of electronic devices at international borders, but have released no such information about searches of domestic air passengers.
United States of America v. State of California et al (filed 3/6/18)
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California
The US Department of Justice filed this lawsuit against California over its "sanctuary state" policy. This step escalates the tensions between the Trump administration and state and local governments over the handling of immigration issues. The lawsuit also names California Governor Jerry Brown and Attorney General Xavier Becerra. The state recently passed three laws that the Trump administration alleges hinder federal enforcement of immigration laws and endanger federal agents.
BlackBerry Limited v. Facebook, Inc. et al (filed 3/6/18)
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
BlackBerry has filed a lawsuit against Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp alleging that Facebook and its subsidiaries have infringed on BlackBerryâs patents with regard to four features: (1) Security improvements; (2) user interface improvements for mobile devices; (3) the combination of mobile gaming and mobile messaging; and (4) battery efficient status updates for mobile devices. BlackBerry used to be leader in the smartphone market; its BlackBerry Messenger feature was once revered as innovative and effective but has since fallen in popularity and use.
Corman et al v. Torres et al (filed 2/22/18)
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Eight House Republicans from Pennsylvania, among others, filed a lawsuit to block Pennsylvania from using the new congressional map put in place by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The suit contends that the supreme court's actions violate the Elections Clause of the US Constitution by requiring that any map adopted during the remedial process comply with redistricting criteria specified in the courtâs order. The plaintiffs also argue that the court failed to give lawmakers adequate time to adopt a remedial plan.
Preterm-Cleveland et al v. Himes et al (filed 2/15/18)
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
The American Civil Liberties Union filed this lawsuit on behalf of Planned Parenthood of Ohio, challenging Ohio's recently enacted law that criminalizes performing an abortion if the person performing the abortion knows that one reason for the woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy is a fetal indication of Down syndrome. The plaintiffs allege that the law infringes on women's constitutional right to abortion.
Other Legal News
Opinion analysis: Justices unanimously reverse 5th Circuit on funding for capital habeas petitions
SCOTUSblog, March 22, 2018
If the Supreme Court unanimously sides with a death-row inmate in a federal habeas case, chances are that the lower-court decision was clearly wrong, and the justices’ own disposition is remarkably narrow. So it was for the court’s ruling today in Ayestas v. Davis, a case about the standard that an indigent prisoner must meet…
It was a tale of two arguments yesterday in Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Lundgren. The first half of the argument featured most of the justices offering scorching criticism of the idea that the tribe could be immune from state jurisdiction over off-reservation land; the second half featured the same group of justices complaining to…
Supreme Court Warily Eyes California Law Involving Abortion and Free Speech
The New York Times, March 20, 2018
The justices heard arguments in a First Amendment challenge to a law requiring “crisis pregnancy centers” to provide information on abortion.
The P.L.O. Has an Unlikely Supreme Court Ally: The Trump Administration
The New York Times, March 19, 2018
After months of internal wrangling, the administration filed a brief urging the justices to turn down an appeal from victims of terrorist attacks in Israel.
Supreme Court Divides Over What a Law Is
Justia's Verdict, March 7, 2018
Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent sharply divided decision by the US Supreme Court in Patchak v. Zinke, in which Court considered whether a particular piece of legislation actually constitutes a law. Dorf explains why the issue was so difficult and points out some of the flaws in reasoning by both the plurality and the dissent.
Revisions to the Rules of the Court
Supreme Court of the United States, September 27, 2017
The Supreme Court of the United States has adopted a revised version of the Rules of the Court. The revisions to the Rules are necessary to implement the Court’s electronic filing system. The revised version will take effect on November 13, 2017 when the electronic filing system will begin operation. New Rule 29.7 provides that filers who are represented by counsel must submit documents through the electronic filing system in conformity with “Guidelines for the...