MeadWestvaco Corporation
The U.S. Supreme Court handed us a victory in MeadWestvaco Corporation v. Illinois Department of Revenue et al., a case concerning the constitutional limitations on a state's power to tax multistate businesses. We represented MeadWestvaco Corporation in a dispute over whether the due process and commerce clauses preclude a state from taxing a nondomiciliary business on a capital transaction that occurred outside of the state. The State of Illinois had imposed a state tax on the approximately $1.5 billion sale by MeadWestvaco of its separate division Lexis/Nexis. The state appellate court sustained the tax, but the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously vacated that decision. The Court held that the Constitution does not permit a state to tax a non-domiciliary business for its activities that occur outside the taxing state unless the business's intrastate and extrastate activities are part of a single unitary business. States such as Illinois have, in recent years, sought to expand the reach of state taxation but, under this ruling, certain of these state taxes likely exceeded the state's constitutional authority and will require state courts to revisit prior rulings.
|
New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, Massachusetts Motor Transportation Association, and Vermont Truck & Bus Association
We won a 9-0 Supreme Court victory in the preemption case of Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association (128 S. Ct. 989 (2008)), prevailing at all three levels of the federal court system (District of Maine, First Circuit Court of Appeals, and U.S. Supreme Court) on behalf of three trucking trade associations: the New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, the Massachusetts Motor Transportation Association, and the Vermont Truck & Bus Association. In front of the Supreme Court of the United States, we won an unusual unanimous ruling that invalidated two provisions of Maine law that would have imposed state regulation on the services that motor carriers provide when they deliver packages containing tobacco.
|
Sierra Pacific Industries
We represented Sierra Pacific in the appeal of Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection, winning a reversal of an intermediate appellate court decision and unanimously prevailing in the California Supreme Court. The California Supreme Court reversed and approved three timber harvest plans for the logging of trees on private land in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The case involved the interpretation of California's Forest Practice Act rules governing the environmental review of timber harvesting plans. With this latest ruling, the California Supreme Court resolved two important issues that have statewide significance. First, the Court established the rules applicable to evaluating cumulative impacts of timber operations in the face of endangered species and harvesting impact claims. A second important aspect of the decision is setting the framework for the evaluation of pesticide and herbicide use in timber operations. The ruling in that regard will extend beyond the harvesting of timber and include many agricultural operations as well.
|
Boyle v. United States
(U.S. Supreme Court, 2009) Filed amicus brief supporting petitioner on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America concerning the association-in-fact enterprise requirement of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
|
Rearden LLC v. Rearden Commerce, Inc.
(Ninth Circuit, pending) Counsel for Rearden LLC in action involving claims for trademark infringement and cybersquatting currently on appeal.
|
Trainer Wortham & Company, Inc. v. Betz
(U.S. Supreme Court, 2010) Filed amicus brief in support of petition for a writ of certiorari on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America and the Organization for International Investment concerning when the statute of limitations begins to run in a federal securities fraud action.
|