Law Commons^™

Reply Brief Of Edward A. And Doris Zelinsky In The New York Tax Appeals Tribunal, Edward A. Zelinsky, Doris Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

Three reasons of state law independently compel a refund of the New York income tax Professor Edward A. Zelinsky paid on the Cardozo Law School salary Professor Zelinsky earned during the COVID period from March 15, 2020 through December 31, 2020. That salary was not New York source income because Professor Zelinsky earned that COVID period salary at his home in Connecticut “wholly without” New York’s borders. 20 N.Y.C.R.R. § 132.4(b). In addition, New York’s “convenience of the employer” rule does not apply to that COVID period salary because Professor Zelinsky’s remote work at home was for Cardozo’s necessity rather …

Brief For Amicus Curiae Professor Edward A. Zelinsky In Support Of Appellants And Reversal, Edward A. Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

DOL’s tie-breaking rule violates ERISA’s duty of loyalty under ERISA § 404(a)(1)(A). ERISA’s duty of loyalty requires ERISA-regulated trustees to invest plan resources for the “exclusive purpose of . . . providing” economic benefits to plan participants and their beneficiaries, “solely in the interest of the participants and beneficiaries.” The tie-breaking rule violates this stringent statutory duty of loyalty because it permits plan trustees investing plan resources to consider “collateral benefits,” i.e., the welfare of third parties or social goals. But ERISA‟s plain text does not permit this result. The words ““solely” and “exclusive purpose” in § 404(a)(1)(A) do not …

Brief For Professors And Legal Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Neither Party, Deborah Pearlstein

Amicus Briefs

The amici curiae consist of professors and legal scholars with a collective experience of over one hundred years in teaching and writing about constitutional law. Their primary interest lies in ensuring that the Court resolves the case in a manner consistent with federalism and separation of powers principles.

Brief For Amici Curiae Bankruptcy Law Professors In Support Of Petitioner, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

Amici, whose names and affiliations are set forth in alphabetical order on Appendix A, are law professors who study the United States’ bankruptcy system. They have published in some of the nation’s leading academic journals on corporate reorganization issues, including the case sub judice. They write solely based on their concern about the effect that the opinion below will have on this system.

Petitioner argues that the decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in this case should be reversed because the United States Bankruptcy Code does not permit the nonconsensual nondebtor release (“NDR”) of the Debtors’ owners (the …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors In Support Of Appellant On The Role Of Bankruptcy Examiners In Chapter 11 Reorganization, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

Amici curiae, whose biographical information appears on Appendix A (“Amici”), are professors at law schools in the Third Circuit and around the nation. They study and write extensively about bankruptcy and related business law subjects. Their work has appeared in many of the nation’s leading academic journals, and includes path-breaking scholarship on the use of bankruptcy examiners in freefall and cryptocurrency cases.

Amici share a commitment to the transparent and efficient administration of the chapter 11 system, and a belief that the interest of the public and creditors in this large and notorious chapter 11 case must be vindicated …

Reply Brief Of The Petitioners-Taxpayers Edward A. And Doris Zelinsky, Edward A. Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

The Division’s Brief confirms that the Tribunal should rule for the taxpayers, Edward A. and Doris Zelinsky Perhaps most egregiously, the Division disparages binding factual stipulations to which the parties agreed at the outset of this litigation. These stipulations confirm that, from March 15, 2020 through December 31, 2020 (“the COVID period”), Professor Zelinsky had no New York office or classroom available to him. Consequently, Professor Zelinsky taught his classes and met with students exclusively on zoom from his Connecticut home. He did not step foot in New York for this nine and one-half month period.

The stipulated facts lead …

Brief Of The Petitioners-Taxpayers Edward A. And Doris Zelinsky, Edward A. Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

As a matter of state law, New York’s own regulations and case law do not permit taxation of Professor Zelinsky’s income earned at home in Connecticut for the COVID-19 period starting on March 15, 2020. Even if New York law permitted the taxation of Professor Zelinsky’s Cardozo salary during this COVID-19 period, as a matter of federal constitutional law, the Due Process and dormant Commerce Clauses do not permit New York’s taxation of this salary earned in Connecticut. In addition, Zelinsky v. Tax Appeals Tribunal, 1 N.Y. 3d 85 (2003), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1009 (2004), does not apply to …

Reply Brief Of Appellant Deanna Thomas, Betsy Ginsberg

Amicus Briefs

Betsy Ginsberg filed a Reply Brief on behalf of Appellant Deanna Thomas.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Tax Law Professors, Young Ran (Christine) Kim

Amicus Briefs

Professors Reuven S. Avi-Yonah, David Gamage, Orly Mazur, Young Ran (Christine) Kim, and Darien Shanske (collectively, “Tax Law Professors”) write this amici curiae brief in support of the Appellant in COMPTROLLER OF MARYLAND v. COMCAST — the Maryland Digital Advertising Case.

Many digital transactions currently evade sales taxation in Maryland, even though the closest non-digital analogues are subject to tax. Specifically, digital advertising platforms like Respondents obtain vast quantities of individualized data from and on Marylanders in currently untaxed transactions. The scope and value of these transactions is vast and growing, as they allow advertising platforms the lucrative opportunity to …

Amici Curiae Brief Of Law Professors In Support Of Plaintiffs’ Motion For Reconsideration, Andrea Kupfer Schneider

Amicus Briefs

Proposed Amici are law professors and scholars who focus on dispute resolution, and they are concerned that the Court’s ruling in this case may undermine the equitable administration of arbitration and erode public confidence in arbitration. Proposed Amici file this brief to provide additional context regarding the unconscionable designation of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell as arbitrator for these civil rights disputes.

Brief Of Legal Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

Amici curiae are professors at law schools throughout the United States. Amici’s expertise encompasses student-financial-assistance programs under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, consumer finance, administrative and constitutional law, modes of statutory interpretation, and the development of the major questions doctrine. Amici have a strong interest in assisting this Court in resolving questions of law that go to the core of their professional expertise and scholarship, namely, the scope of the Department of Education’s authority to provide relief to borrowers and the development of this Court’s statutory interpretation methodology, particularly in the context of its precedent …

Brief Of Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Applicants’ Application To Vacate The Injunction Entered By The United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

Amici curiae Dean Erwin Chemerinsky and Professors William Araiza, Matthew Bruckner, Pamela Foohey, Jonathan Glater, Luke Herrine, Dalié Jiménez, Jeffrey Lubbers, Chrystin Ondersma, Peter Shane, and Peter Strauss are professors of law at universities throughout the United States, with expertise in student financial assistance programs under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 and administrative and constitutional law. Amici file this brief in support of Applicants because this case presents important questions within amici’s professional expertise, namely, the scope of the Department of Education’s authority to provide relief to borrowers and the development of this Court’s statutory …

Brief Of Amici Curiae On Behalf Of Professors In Support Of Petitioner, Leslie Salzman, Rebekah Diller

Amicus Briefs

Amici curiae are professors who research, write, and teach about disability law, special education, civil rights, and administrative law. They are interested in the proper application of the statutes that protect disabled students’ rights and in the scope of exhaustion doctrine. Amici also have an interest in preserving the ability of parties to voluntarily settle disputes, particularly in the context of the legislative schemes here, which encourage cooperation between parties.

Amicus Curiae Brief Of Professors Anthony J. Sebok And John C. P. Goldberg In Support Of Appellee The Devereux Foundation, Inc., Anthony J. Sebok

Amicus Briefs

Amici Anthony J. Sebok and John C. P. Goldberg are law professors with a particular focus in the field of tort law and damages. As scholars in this field, Amici recognize that the issues raised in this case are of tremendous importance to the history, theory, and development of tort law in the United States. The distinction between compensatory damages and punitive damages has long been recognized in both U.S. and Georgia law. Amici have a distinct interest in this Court reaching a correct decision with the benefit of complete and accurate historical information regarding the awarding of punitive damages …

Amicus Curiae Brief Of The Hon. Judith Fitzgerald (Bankruptcy Judge, Ret.), And Law Professors Pamela Foohey, George Kuney, Robert Lawless, Jonathan Lipson, Bruce A. Markell, Nancy Rapoport, Richard Squire, Ray Warner And Jack Williams, In Support Of The Petitioner, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

Your amici have taught courses on bankruptcy and commercial law, conducted research, and have been frequent speakers and lecturers at seminars and conferences throughout the United States. Each is highly regarded in this field, and each has made substantial contributions to bankruptcy scholarship and jurisprudence.

The question presented to this Court is as follows: “Whether Bankruptcy Code Section 363(m) limits the appellate court’s jurisdiction over any sale order or order deemed integral to a sale order. . . .” (emphasis added). Pet. i. The answer is that § 363(m) does not limit appellate review of the transaction involved in this …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Maureen Carroll, Christine Bartholomew, Andrew Bradt, Brooke Coleman, Robin Effron, Myriam Gilles, Robert Klonoff, Suzette Malveaux, David Marcus, Elizabeth Porter, D. Theodore Rave, Elizabeth Schneider, And Adam Zimmerman In Support Of Defendants-Appellees/Cross Appellants, Myriam E. Gilles

Amicus Briefs

Amici are law professors with expertise in the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Amici have written extensively about class action litigation, including the use of class actions in civil rights cases seeking declaratory or injunctive relief. Together, we share an interest in ensuring that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure continue to be construed so as to ensure the “just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” FED. R. CIV. P. 1.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors In Support Of Appellees Regarding The “Abuse” Standard, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

This amicus brief explains how and why the nondebtor releases granted to the Sackler family, and a large and indeterminate number of other persons and entities in the chapter 11 reorganization of opioid-maker Purdue Pharma, were "abusive" as that term has historically been understood in bankruptcy.

In the 2005 Metromedia opinion, the Second Circuit warned that a nondebtor release "lends itself to abuse" because it “operates as a bankruptcy discharge arranged without a filing and without the safeguards of the Bankruptcy Code.” Liabilities arising from fraudulent transfers, as well as “willful and malicious injury,” have been considered classic examples of …

Brief Of Amici Curiae 23 Law Professors In Support Of Petitioner, Leslie Salzman, Rebekah Diller, Cardozo Bet Tzedek Legal Services

Amicus Briefs

On January 18, the Bet Tzedek Civil Litigation Clinic, co-directed by Professors Rebekah Diller and Leslie Salzman, filed a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief in support of certiorari in the case of a deaf student who suffered 12 years of isolation and distress because his school refused to provide him with a qualified sign language interpreter (Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools). The clinic filed on behalf of 23 law professors who argued that the Court’s intervention was needed to ensure that disabled students can pursue damage claims when their rights are violated in school settings.

Amici Curiae Observations On Sexual- And Gender-Based Crimes, Particularly Sexual Slavery, And On Cumulative Convictions Pursuant To Rule 103 Of The Rules Of Procedure And Evidence, Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum

Amicus Briefs

Sexual slavery is not a “form” of enslavement; rather, all acts of a sexual nature, including control over sexuality, sexual integrity and sexual and reproductive autonomy, constitute indicia of the exercise of powers of ownership of enslavement in all its forms. Consequently, enslavement as a crime against humanity is not “in the abstract entirely encompassed within sexual slavery.” To avoid entering cumulative convictions for separately enumerated crimes that do not each have a distinct element from the other, and to avoid a continuation of a discriminatory application of the law, amici suggest that, in the interests of justice, the …

Motion For Leave To File And Brief For Amici Curiae Legal Scholars And Academics In Support Of Petitioner, David Rudenstine

Amicus Briefs

Amici Curiae are legal scholars and academics who have dedicated their careers to the study, teaching and practice of United States constitutional law, including the death penalty and methods of execution. Many amici have written scholarly articles on these topics.

Many amici listed below earlier wrote to this Court in 2018 by submitting a brief in Bucklew v. Precythe, 139 S. Ct. 1112 (2019), to apprise the Court of information regarding the availability of alternative methods of execution to be considered in clarifying the applicable Eighth Amendment standard for method-of-execution challenges. Amici agreed with the Court’s clear statement in …

Brief Of Complex Litigation Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Myriam E. Gilles

Amicus Briefs

The amici are law professors who teach and write in the field of federal civil procedure and complex litigation. Amici share an interest in presenting this Court with an impartial view on the function of the class action and its relationship to the law of Article III justiciability to inform the question presented in this case.

Brief Of Professor Edward A. Zelinsky As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Plaintiff’S Motion For Leave To File Bill Of Complaint, Edward A. Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

Professor Edward Zelinsky submitted an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in New Hampshire’s constitutional challenge against Massachusetts’s recently promulgated regulation imposing its income tax on nonresident remote workers, arguing that the Court should grant New Hampshire’s motion for leave because a state cannot source nonresidents’ income earned beyond the state’s borders; taxpayers have “no practical remedy” for relief from unconstitutional taxation under the Tax Injunction Act; and only the Court can make rulings over the boundaries of state authority.

Brief For Plaintiff-Appellant, Alexander A. Reinert

Amicus Briefs

Plaintiff-Appellant Devin Darby ("Plaintiff' or "Darby") brought this action pro se in the District Court, after experiencing several months of excruciating pain while in the care and custody of Appellees-Defendants David Greenman, Rafael Hamilton, and John Doe Nos. 1 and 2 ("Defendants"). Although Plaintiff clearly pleaded the grounds establishing that Defendants violated the constitution by failing to provide treatment for Mr. Darby's painful and swollen gums, the District Court dismissed the action. The District Court entered its dismissal even though no arguments were presented on behalf of Defendant Hamilton and John Doe Nos. 1 and 2. Indeed, at the time …

Amicus Memoriais, Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum, Cardozo Human Rights & Atrocity Prevention Clinic

Amicus Briefs

Professor Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum and the Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic submitted an amicus brief in the Brazilian Supreme Court for a landmark ruling for the Xokleng people.

Observations Of Professor Gabor Rona On The Pre-Trial Chamber's Conclusion That Events Beyond The Territory Of Afghanistan Lack Sufficient Nexus To The Armed Conflict There For Pruposes Of Application Of Rome Statute War Crimes, Gabor Rona

Amicus Briefs

Prof. Gabor Rona, Director of CLIHHR's Law and Armed Conflict Project, submitted an amicus brief to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in connection with the Prosecutor's request to commence an investigation into international crimes arising out of the situation in Afghanistan. A Pre-Trial Chamber (PTC) had rejected the Prosecutor's request to investigate CIA war crimes arising from secret detention and torture of detainees at "black sites" in Poland, a State Party to the ICC Treaty. The PTC held that those events lacked sufficient nexus to the armed conflict in Afghanistan. Rona argues to the Appellate Chamber that both the Geneva …

Brief Of Douglas Laycock, James E. Pfander, Alexander A. Reinert And Joanna C. Schwartz As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Alexander A. Reinert

Amicus Briefs

Amici are legal scholars whose focus includes remedies, federal courts, the separation of powers, and constitutional law. They have a strong professional interest in the proper development of the law, which includes accounting for the best available empirical evidence and structural legal principles bearing on the questions here at issue.

Amici are Douglas Laycock, Robert E. Scott, Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law; James E. Pfander, Owen L. Coon Professor of Law at the Pritzker School of Law at Northwestern University; Alexander A. Reinert, Max Freund Professor of Litigation and Advocacy at the Benjamin …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Andrea Armstrong, Sharon Dolovich, Betsy Ginsberg, Michael B. Mushlin, Alexander A. Reinert, Laura Rovner, And Margo Schlanger In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellee, Betsy Ginsberg, Alexander A. Reinert

Amicus Briefs

Amici are legal scholars who study the treatment of incarcerated people under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Writing and teaching about this topic is a central focus of their work. Amici have a shared interest in the lawful treatment of incarcerated men and women and fidelity to the principles established by the Supreme Court of the United States in Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976). They believe that all people, regardless of their gender identity, are entitled to constitutionally adequate medical treatment consistent with the rule of Estelle.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors And Economists In Support Of Petitioner, Edward A. Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

Amici are professors of tax law and economics at universities across the United States. As scholars and teachers, they have considered the economic consequences of this Court’s decision in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992), and have concluded that Quill’s dormant Commerce Clause holding should be overruled. Amici join this brief solely on their own behalf and not as representatives of their universities. A full list of amici appears in Appendix A.

Brief Of Tax Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Edward A. Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

Amici are professors of tax law at universities across the United States. As scholars and teachers, they have considered the doctrinal roots and practical consequences of judicial limits on state and local taxation. Amici join this brief solely on their own behalf and not as representatives of their universities. A full list of amici appears in the Appendix to this brief.

Brief Of Interested Law Professors As Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioner, Edward A. Zelinsky

Amicus Briefs

Amici curiae are 14 professors of law who have devoted much of their teaching and research to the area of state taxes and the role of state tax policy in our federal system. The names and affiliations (for identification purposes only) of amici are included in an addendum to this brief. The amici are concerned with the effect of this Court’s dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence on the development of fair and efficient state tax systems. No decision of this Court has had more effect on state sales and use tax systems than Quill Corporation v. North Dakota. We believe …