Case at a Glance

Under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), an eligible employee with a health condition that prevents her from performing her job functions is entitled to 12 weeks leave during any 12-month period. Department of Labor (DOL) regulations further state that employer-provided leave does not begin to count against this 12-week entitlement unless and until the employer notifies the employee that it is designating the leave as FMLA leave. The Supreme Court will now decide whether these DOL regulations are valid.

• Previewed by Theresa L. Schulz, an employment lawyer in Lake Elmo, Minn.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

The Court previously held that temporary takings are compensable. In this case, residential lot owners have been precluded from building homes around Lake Tahoe by a series of "temporary moratoria" that have lasted close to two decades. The lot owners ask for compensation for one part of those moratoria. The Ninth Circuit said, "no," reasoning that the life of property is infinite. Maybe so, say the lot owners, but our mortal lives are not.

• Previewed by Douglas W. Kmiec, Dean and St. Thomas More Professor of Law at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

The Supreme Court will review a federal circuit's controversial en banc decision that expanded the doctrine of "prosecution history estoppel" in a way that would significantly limit the use of the "doctrine of equivalents," a very important aid to patent owners in infringement actions. How the Court balances these two doctrines will be important not only with regard to the scope of patent protection but also to the process of how patents are obtained.

• Previewed by Hugh C. Hansen, a professor of law at Fordham University School of Law in New York City.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

In this Title VII case, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission defends its regulation allowing alleged job-discrimination victims to amend their timely filed allegations beyond the statute of limitations. The EEOC says its rule is permitted under the law and necessary to help vindicate victims' rights. An employer says the regulation violates Title VII and is unfair to companies.

• Previewed by Steve Lash, a Maryland lawyer who has written extensively on the U.S. Supreme Court for numerous publications.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

During a bankruptcy, creditors are automatically stayed from pursuing collection. Most debtors receive a discharge, generally rendering past debts permanently unenforceable. However, there is no discharge of income taxes due within the three years before bankruptcy. This case concerns debtors with overdue recent taxes who filed for bankruptcy, thereby staying the tax collector, only to withdraw their case and file a new one once the three years had passed.

• Previewed by John P. Hennigan Jr., a professor of law at St. John's University School of Law in Jamaica, N.Y.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

The plaintiff filed employment discrimination claims against Amtrak. Although the claims were timely, they asked the court to consider conduct that would be time-barred if sued upon alone. The district court held that Amtrak could not be liable for any conduct occurring outside the applicable 300-day limitations period. At issue is the "continuing violations doctrine," which, if applied, would allow otherwise time-barred conduct to be considered if it is significantly related to actionable conduct and represents an ongoing unlawful employment practice.

• Previewed by Mary Phelan D'Isa, a professor of law at Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Lansing, Mich.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

This case involves the extent of the IRS's ability to place a lien on certain property. Section 6321 of the Internal Revenue Code provides that federal tax liens attach to all the property and rights to property of a delinquent taxpayer. Many states, however, do not allow liens to attach to property an individual owns by a "tenancy by the entirety" with his or her spouse. The IRS contends that federal law supersedes any inconsistent state law in this area, but many taxpayers have disagreed.

• Previewed by Daniel L. Hogans, an attorney with the Groom Law Group in Washington D.C.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

Plaintiffs in § 1983 civil rights cases need not exhaust state administrative remedies before filing suit, since the 1871 Act places the federal courts between the states and the people to protect the people from unconstitutional action under color of state law. By enacting the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Congress created an exception that requires exhaustion of administrative remedies in prison conditions cases. Does this exception apply to a prisoner who claims he was beaten by guards in violation of the Eighth Amendment?

• Previewed by Michael Kaye, a professor of law at Washburn University of Topeka Law School in Topeka, Kan.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

The National Labor Relations Act prohibits firing employees because they have engaged in union organizing activities. The Immigration Reform and Control Act prohibits knowingly hiring aliens who are not authorized to work in the United States. This case presents an apparent conflict between the objectives of the NLRA (the prevention and remediation of unfair labor practices) and the IRCA (the denial of employment to undocumented aliens) based on an award of backpay to an undocumented worker who was fired because of his union organizing activities.

• Previewed by Barbara J. Fick, an associate professor of law at Notre Dame Law School in Notre Dame, Ind.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

To "plead" a claim in federal court, a claimant need merely give "a short and plain statement of the claim." Only claims for fraud and mistake require factually particular allegations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Nevertheless, some federal courts have imposed higher pleading standards in civil rights cases. This case asks whether heightened pleading is required for national origin and age discrimination claims under the federal civil rights statutes notwithstanding the simplified pleading rules.

• Previewed by Mary Phelan D'Isa, a professor of law at Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Lansing, Mich.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

States are increasingly adopting statutes that establish independent review panels to decide disputes between enrollees and their HMOs over whether treatment is medically necessary. If the independent reviewer disagrees with the HMO, such laws often require the HMO to pay for the treatment. Litigation that grapples with the acceptability of this approach under ERISA preemption rules in the context of a claim for out-of-network benefits has now reached the United States Supreme Court.

• Previewed by Elliott B. Pollack, a member of the adjunct faculty of the University of Connecticut School of Law and co-chair of the Health Care Section in the Hartford office of the Connecticut law firm Pullman & Comley.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision

Case at a Glance

The Social Security Act provides benefits to individuals who become disabled prior to retirement. A provision of the Act defines a "disabled" worker as one who cannot engage in "substantial gainful activity" because of an "impairment" that lasts or is expected to last at least 12 months. The question for the Court concerns whether a claimant can receive disability benefits even if he has been able to engage in some "substantial gainful activity" despite his impairment.

• Previewed by David L. Hudson, an attorney with the First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.

Supreme Court Decision: Click to read decision