International Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension Fund v. Florida Glass of Tampa Bay, Inc., Case No. 25-1312 (4th Cir. 2026).
A multiemployer pension plan's contingent proof of claim filed in bankruptcy proceedings constitutes neither notice and demand nor acceleration of withdrawal liability under ERISA and the MPPAA.
Doe v. Burlew, Case Nos. 24-5669/5743 (6th Cir. 2026).
As-applied claims require challengers to demonstrate only that a law violates the Constitution as applied to the specific conduct the challenger seeks to undertake, while facial claims demand a far more expansive showing that the law violates the Constitution in a much broader set of fact patterns, and a district court must conduct a comprehensive factual review establishing that the law prohibits substantial protected speech relative to its plainly legitimate sweep on speech overbreadth claims.
Lifestyle Communities, Ltd. v. City of Worthington, Case No. 25-3048 (6th Cir. 2026).
Property owners possess no constitutionally protected property interest in having a property rezoned to the owner’s desired zoning.
Dahdah v. Rocket Mortgage, LLC, Case No. 24-1910 (6th Cir. 2026).
Conspicuous hyperlinked terms of use accompanying clickwrap agreements provide sufficient notice to form enforceable arbitration agreements under California contract law.
Reinhardt Enters., LLC v. Kaseya U.S., LLC, Case No. 25-1069 (8th Cir. 2026).
Contract termination provisions requiring parties to define undefined terms according to ordinary and popular meaning create ambiguity when the term is reasonably susceptible to multiple interpretations supporting contrary positions.
Chase v. Andeavor Logistics, L.P., Case No. 23-3019 (8th Cir. 2026).
Allottees of Indian trust lands lack standing to pursue federal common law trespass claims that the United States has undertaken to prosecute on their behalf.
Avery v. TEKsystems, Inc., Case No. 24-5810 (9th Cir. 2026).
District courts possess authority under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(d) to decline enforcement of arbitration agreements rolled out through misleading communications that threaten the fairness of certified class action proceedings.
George v. Chieftain Royalty Co., Case Nos. 24-6227 and 24-6228 (10th Cir. 2026).
Oklahoma law permits the percentage-of-fund or lodestar methodology for calculating class action attorneys' fees, provided the ultimate award satisfies statutory reasonableness factors.
