Mid-New York Environmental and Sustainability Promotion Committee, Inc. v. Dragon Springs Buddhist, Inc., Case No. 24-2451 (2d Cir. 2025).
Clean Water Act pre-suit notice requirements are procedural conditions rather than jurisdictional prerequisites, and a notice under the Act which contains sufficient information to identify the specific discharge, pollutant, and regulatory standards at issue adequately informs the recipient of alleged violations.
Honda Lease Trust v. Malanga's Automotive, Case No. 24-2369 (3d Cir. 2025).
Impoundment policies, in order to satisfy due process requirements, must provide adequate notice to all property interest holders within a reasonable time period and also provide meaningful post-deprivation hearings at which to challenge the lawfulness of the action taken.
In re: Yellow Corporation, Case No. 25-1421 (3d Cir. 2025).
An agency interpretation of statutory terms is entitled to judicial deference over bankruptcy code provisions when Congress expressly delegates definitional authority to the agency, and PBGC regulations restricting consideration of special financial assistance in withdrawal liability calculations represent valid exercises of delegated regulatory power under ARPA.
Amazon.com, Inc. v. WDC Holdings LLC, Case No. 23-1991 (4th Cir. 2025).
RICO association-in-fact enterprises require proof of common purpose, relationships among participants, and sufficient longevity, and as a result, summary judgment is inappropriate when genuine disputes exist regarding real estate enterprise structure and alleged injury through kickback schemes.
WorldVue Connect Global, L.L.C. v. Szuch, Case No. 24-20571 (5th Cir. 2025).
Non-compete covenant geographic restrictions apply to all employees performing work within the restricted territory regardless of their physical location, and breach of non-solicitation agreements constitutes irreparable injury supporting preliminary injunctive relief.
Fantasia v. Diodato, Case No. 23-3742 (9th Cir. 2025).
Bankruptcy court orders reimposing automatic stays constitute final appealable orders requiring immediate appeal under the Ritzen Group doctrine because those orders definitively dispose of discrete procedural disputes within the overarching bankruptcy case.
Rajabian v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Case No. 24-3000 (9th Cir. 2025).
Colorado River abstention analysis requires consideration of parallel state proceedings and absence of material changes in law or fact, and additionally, district court minute orders constitute separate documents for appeal timing purposes under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.
