Former Brann & Isaacson Paralegal Jordan Goldberg to Clerk at the U.S. Supreme Court

Brann & Issacson is pleased to congratulate our former colleague, Jordan Goldberg, for earning a coveted position as law clerk to U.S Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor. “We are thrilled that Jordan has been selected for such a competitive position in the highest court in the country,” says Stacy O. Stitham, Managing Partner at...

To Be Or Not To Be: Standing In Invasion of Privacy Cases

In the case of Frank v. Gaos, argued before the United States Supreme Court on October 31, 2018, oral argument took an unexpected turn, leading the Justices to direct the parties (and the Solicitor General) to brief the question of whether any named plaintiff had standing, i.e., whether they were in fact injured, in a...

Spokeo Speaks — Again

In Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit has again allowed a case to go forward on a gossamer thread of alleged “harm,” despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s admonition that concrete harm must alleged.

Arbitration Redux: Supreme Court Speaks Again

Just seven days after my last blog post on arbitration clauses, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia finding, yet again, that a class action waiver provision was enforceable against a consumer.  Although the decision turned on a rather nuanced question of contract interpretation, it serves as a powerful reminder of...

Direct Marketing Association Oral Argument Update

Oral argument in the case of Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl occurred on December 8, 2014.   For  readers who are following the case, we thought it would be useful not only to recap some of the high points of the argument, but also to provide a list of resources and press reactions.  Both a...

Retroactively Speaking: Michigan Imposes Over $1 Billion In New Income Taxes Going Back to 2008

The battle over income apportionment just took dramatic turn in Michigan, and the stakes could not be higher.  In July, the Supreme Court of Michigan ruled that IBM had a right to use a 3-factor apportionment formula for its 2008 tax year, despite the state’s insistence that the company was required to use a sales-factor...