Washington Legal Foundation
Non-Profit Associations |
Policy/Advocacy
2009 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036
Recent News About Washington Legal Foundation
-
NEWARK (Legal Newsline) - The Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) is among the organizations that have filed an amicus brief arguing against the appeal of a federal judge’s decision to allow Johnson & Johnson to proceed with its bankruptcy.
-
NEW ORLEANS (Legal Newsline) - The Washington Legal Foundation (WLF), a public-interest law firm, has asked a federal appeals court to decertify a class of USAA life insurance policyholders, who are alleging that the company breached their life insurance policies by considering “unlisted factors” when setting their cost of insurance rates.
-
WASHINGTON (Legal Newsline) - Many elected officials are oblivious to the restrictions on health care access and the overall damage to the economy caused by rampant abuse of the legal system, Tiger Joyce, president of the American Tort Reform Association, told the Washington Legal Foundation in a recent interview.
-
TRENTON, N.J. (Legal Newsline) – Makers of parts that did not contain asbestos – but would later need to be used with parts that did – owed a duty to warn users, according to the New Jersey Supreme Court.
-
WASHINGTON – According to one Washington observer, the Philadelphia-based American Law Institute needs to remain true to its mission of distilling and clarifying law, or else strongly consider whether it is appropriate to have judges as members of its ranks.
-
The good news about polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, is scientists have yet to uncover a “signature disease” associated with the ubiquitous chemicals once used to manufacture products as varied as waterproof outdoor gear and the packaging for chocolate cake mix.
-
WASHINGTON (Legal Newsline) – An American free enterprise advocacy group has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a federal appeals court decision made earlier this year in the case of a blind man suing a nationwide pizza delivery chain over an alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
-
The order, released in June, holds, among other things, that punitive damages awards are no longer deferred for cases placed on the trial calendar after the CMO’s effective date.
-
Cordis Corp. filed its petition for writ of certiorari, or review, with the nation’s highest court last month. The company, which makes IVC filters, wants the court to reaffirm defendants’ statutory right to remove cases of “national significance” to federal court.
-
The U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Labor-Management Standards published its notice in June, explaining it intends to rescind the rule, first published by the DOL in March 2016. The rule, or Persuader Advice Exemption Rule, effectively eliminates the “advice exemption” under the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act.
-
The U.S. Department of Labor’s controversial new rule mandates financial professionals who service individual retirement accounts, including IRAs and 401(k) plans, to serve the “best interest” of the savers and disclose conflicts of interest.
-
The persuader rule, or Persuader Advice Exemption Rule, was meant to effectively eliminate the “advice exemption” under the Labor-Management Reporting Disclosure Act, or LMRDA. Basically, LMRDA requires employers to report each time they engage a consultant to persuade employees on how to use their collective bargaining rights.
-
The Washington Legal Foundation is among those calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to overturn a Pennsylvania federal court’s decision that, they argue, would undermine class-wide settlements by permitting plaintiff states to file copycat lawsuits despite benefiting from a settlement.
-
In its brief, the Washington Legal Foundation contends the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota erred by holding at the preliminary injunction stage that the plaintiffs’ facial challenge to the Persuader Advice Exemption Rule can succeed only by showing that the rule would be invalid in all of its applications.
-
The Washington Legal Foundation, a D.C.-based public interest law firm, recently filed an amicus brief in Associated Builders and Contractors of Arkansas v. Perez. The foundation, citing a recent Texas federal court ruling, argues the new Persuader Advice Exemption Rule violates First Amendment protections.
-
ST. LOUIS (Legal Newsline) – The question of supervisory liability was recently raised in an
appeals court case concerning salmonella in eggs.
-
The USPS, which provides similar delivery services as FedEx and UPS, is highly unlikely to be pursued by the U.S. Department of Justice for its possible role in transporting illegal prescription drugs. Legal experts point to the Post Office’s poor financial health and the federal government’s reluctance to enforce rules against themselves.
-
The agency’s final guidelines were released earlier this month, recommending primary care physicians use other therapies for chronic pain and exercise caution when prescribing the prescription drugs. The Washington Legal Foundation says it fears plaintiffs firms, some of which have ties to the guideline development committee, will end up using them in their pending litigation against drug makers.
-
The Washington Legal Foundation filed a brief with the state’s high court this week, contesting the First Appellate District’s January decision upholding a nearly $4 million punitive-damage award against Kaiser Gypsum. WLF argues that lower courts need guidance regarding how they can conduct punitive-damages-only retrials, and that the trial judge in this case denied the defendant a fair trial.
