CA6: maritime cargo insurance policy did not cover costs associated with shipping delays caused by loch closure by the Army Corp of Engineers except as already paid by insurer under Extra Expense Clause https://t.co/Hqc8dJ6Eoa @DRIAppellate
CA2: DC erred in concluding as a matter of law that loans with floating price conversion option (converting loans into stock) were not usurious https://t.co/TUGM6PoUDX @DRIAppellate
CA2: Investment Advisers Act of 1940 authorizes rescission of contract when performance of contract is illegal, not merely when performance under contract is illegal https://t.co/PKLNV38Mkw @DRIAppellate
CA2 DC had subject matter jurisdiction under Edge Act for claim against defendant bank because D was an "Edge bank" and claim arose out of transaction involving international or foreign banking https://t.co/0XIbVAnhT4 @DRIAppellate
CA2: although P could not use RICO to recover for a personal injury, he could recover for injuries to his "business or property" that resulted from a personal injury, in this case lost earnings https://t.co/AF8AsQ0sER @DRIAppellate
CA2: class action settlement vacated; free subscriptions given to class were coupons; DC should have evaluated reasonableness of atty fees award in context of overall fairness of settlement and in light of case being a coupon settlement https://t.co/50eleAEOfa @DRIAppellate
CA2: limitation period for claim under sec. 1983 and Title IX for alleged sexual abuse of minor is the NY personal injury limitations period, not the extended one under NY Child Victims Act https://t.co/LUawQQFRt5 @DRIAppellate
CA2: convertible note in investment transaction not unconscionable, DC reversed; lack of consideration for note a question of fact https://t.co/AajfPTuIQU @DRIAppellate
CA2: class decertified in Section 10(b) case against Goldman Sachs; Ds rebutted the Basic presumption; corrective disclosures did not match alleged misrepresentations, no presumption that misrepresentations affected stock price https://t.co/A6fQnmK39k @DRIAppellate
CA6: affs NLRB inj., including temp. reinstatement of fired union-organizing employees colloquially known as the Memphis Seven, against Starbucks; concurrence questions the test applied in NLRB cases instead of traditional std for injs. https://t.co/vqoGvqunp8 @DRIAppellate
CA2: arbitrations of AEDA claims properly judged untimely under arbitration agreements; judge-made "piggybacking rule" only related to administrative exhaustion of EEOC claims; had no impact on contractual deadline to arbitrate https://t.co/LGQuHAiMg4 @DRIAppellate
CA2: attempted class action to hold creditor in contempt for violating bankruptcy court discharge orders; court could not hold creditor in contempt of orders entered by other courts https://t.co/B6oYdfpXbI @DRIAppellate
CA5: under TX law, affs no-duty-to-defend determination based on ins. policy's pollution exclusion and pleaded allegations but revs no-duty-to-indemnify determination b/c it was premature as that duty is determined by evidence developed https://t.co/9LEwnOKxUW @DRIAppellate
CA5: break-up fee and expense reimbursement to stalking horse bidder were lawful under BK code because they provided benefit to estate and were made in reasonable exercise of business judgment https://t.co/lUmhJ2QdBK @DRIAppellate
CA6: on different grounds than below, affs dismissal of claimed constitutional violations against Southfield MI's emergency medical personnel and the city for pronouncing a person as dead when actually alive https://t.co/0eyomtMWoE @DRIAppellate
CA2: forum selection clause in agreement was permissive; applying modified forum non conveniens test, suit in new York allowed https://t.co/Q67bg3doJE @DRIAppellate
CA5: LA lacks Art. III standing to continue litigation about Jefferson Parish School Board's policy during virtual school that punished two kids for having BB guns visible in virtual class https://t.co/vlFYpbxHIM @DRIAppellate
CA2: reversing dismissal of RICO claim; 1995 RICO amendment bars RICO claims only when the alleged fraud is in the actual purchase or sale of securities, not when securities are incidental to the fraud https://t.co/ZBd2dLarxf @DRIAppellate
CA5: revs SJ in products liability action because fact issue existed on tolling of the 1-year LA prescription (limitations) period https://t.co/99JfLreGwF @DRIAppellate