Tony Mauro

May 30, 2007 | Law.com

The Supreme Court on Tuesday made it significantly easier for employers to defend against Title VII workplace discrimination claims that are based on long-ago decisions about salary and raises. By a 5-4 vote, the Court said that employees claiming they received disparate treatment based on gender or race must do so within 180 days of the original discriminatory action -- not within 180 days of their last paycheck. Business groups applauded the ruling in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

By Tony Mauro

5 minute read

September 03, 2009 | Law.com

If at first you don't succeed, try another Supreme Court justice. That's what Mayer Brown's Philip Lacovara did on behalf of his client, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport, Conn., in seeking to delay release of thousands of pages of documents in sexual abuse cases brought against priests. After Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg denied a stay of the release, Lacovara renewed his request to Justice Antonin Scalia. The stay application has now been referred to the full Court for consideration later this month.

By Tony Mauro

3 minute read

April 29, 2005 | The Legal Intelligencer

Pesticide manufacturers lost Wednesday in their Supreme Court bid to avoid facing products liability lawsuits in state courts nationwide.

By Tony Mauro

3 minute read

September 15, 2011 | Daily Business Review

The Institute for Justice has championed libertarian causes ranging from eminent domain challenges to gun rights. The Washington-based litigators plan to expand with a Florida chapter.

By Tony Mauro

6 minute read

February 12, 2007 | The Legal Intelligencer

One year after joining the nation's highest court, Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. says he finally knows his way around the Supreme Court building. But he is still perplexed by something else: why the Court is deciding so few cases.

By Tony Mauro

8 minute read

January 13, 2004 | Law.com

Organized crime kingpin Sammy "The Bull" Gravano is asking the Supreme Court for help in recovering more than $300,000 in royalties he earned from Peter Maas' 1997 best-selling book about him, "Underboss." While the Supreme Court may not sympathize with Gravano's financial plight, his lawyers are hoping his First Amendment argument will catch the court's attention.

By Tony Mauro

5 minute read

March 31, 2009 | National Law Journal

The arguments before the Supreme Court Monday in consolidated cases related to a long-running asbestos litigation packed the Court's lawyers' section with insurance and bankruptcy law practitioners, among others. Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, now of counsel at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, was in the audience as well. The arguments were lively, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who may have had her first chemotherapy treatment for pancreatic cancer on Friday, was the most aggressive questioner.

By Tony Mauro

3 minute read

July 20, 2009 | National Law Journal

At least three Sonia Sotomayors were portrayed before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week -- all three versions born of the political dynamics of modern-day Supreme Court confirmation hearings, which seem to require nominees to disavow all emotions and opinions. Which Sotomayor will take the end seat of the Court reserved for junior justices after her near-certain confirmation this summer? And what do the different portraits say about her and about the craft of judging?

By Tony Mauro

8 minute read

July 22, 2003 | The Legal Intelligencer

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week rejected the Federal Tort Claims Act case filed by survivors of the Branch Davidian standoff based on their only appellate issue - that the U.S. district judge in Waco, Texas who heard their case should have recused himself because of alleged bias.

By Tony Mauro

5 minute read

December 09, 2004 | National Law Journal

Ruling in a closely watched intellectual property case, the Supreme Court gave both sides something to celebrate Wednesday. The Court's unanimous ruling in KP Permanent Make-Up v. Lasting Impression said the law tolerates "a certain degree of confusion on the part of consumers," a view favoring alleged infringers. But it also gave trademark holders a partial victory when it said evidence of likely consumer confusion is relevant and can be introduced by trademark holders when suing.

By Tony Mauro

3 minute read