esterday, the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute filed its reply brief with the Ninth Circuit in its appeal on behalf of Doctors Michael Couris and Michael Fitzgibbons challenging a new California state law, AB 2098.
HLLI's Anna St. John and Ned Hedley write at The Federalist Society: The plaintiffs challenging the ESG Rule argue that it is contrary to the ERISA statute, exceeds the DOL’s authority, and is arbitrary and capricious. Utah v. Walsh also presents separation of powers questions.
Today, the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute asked a federal court to stop the Department of Labor from enforcing its revised Prudence and Loyalty in Selecting Plan Investments and Exercising Shareholder Rights regulation.
Yesterday, the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute filed its opening brief with the Ninth Circuit in its suit by Doctors Michael Couris and Michael Fitzgibbons challenging a new California state law, AB 2098, that restricts doctors’ First Amendment free speech rights by threatening disciplinary action for discussing with patients anything about COVID-19 that the State views as “misinformation.”
Law360's covers the conclusion of the Stericycle litigation, where HLLI represented an objector who successfully won vacatur of an excessive $11.25 million fee award in the Seventh Circuit.
SCOTUSblog's Kalvis Golde highlighted the pair of cert petitions filed by HLLI in St. John v. Jones and Yeatman v. Hyland.
On Thursday, the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute filed suit challenging the Department of Labor’s revised Prudence and Loyalty in Selecting Plan Investments and Exercising Shareholder Rights regulation. HLLI joins 25 states, Western Energy Alliance, and Liberty Energy, Inc., in challenging the new rule as contrary to the ERISA statute and an arbitrary and capricious exercise of the Department’s regulatory authority.
On Friday, the Eleventh Circuit added HLLI's appeal of the Southern District of Florida's approval of an unfair settlement to the tentative calendar for oral argument. HLLI's appeal should be heard by the Court sometime in late February 2023.
On Wednesday, HLLI filed suit on behalf of Doctors Michael Couris and Michael Fitzgibbons challenging a new California state law that restricts doctors’ First Amendment free speech rights.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Washington, DC – Over a dozen advocacy groups and individuals filed amicus briefs in Greenberg v. Lehocky, Appellate Case No. 22-1733 (3rd. Cir.), Pennsylvania’s attempt to overrule HLLI’s victory enjoining the state’s unconstitutional regulation of attorney speech, Rule 8.4(g). HLLI challenged Rule 8.4(g) on behalf of attorney Zachary Greenberg, a Pennsylvania-licensed attorney working for a non-profit organization that advocates on behalf of students’ constitutional rights and regularly speaks at legal…