Striking a blow to the President and the National Labor Relations Board, the U.S. Supreme Court held that three recess appointments made by President Barack Obama in January 2012 were invalid.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released on June 26 its long-awaited report on virtual currencies undertaken at the request of Senator Tom Carper, chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs.
During passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), a debate erupted over the future of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), a well-established program that now offers coverage to 8 million children in low- and moderate-income families.
The court refined its previous test for air quality impacts analysis under CEQA, and required recirculation of an EIR due to its failure to specifically analyze the impacts on human health resulting from the change in air quality due to the project’s air emissions.
Food and Drug Administration regulations do not prevent Church & Dwight Co. from bringing a false advertising suit against SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics GmbH in connection with the company’s Clearblue home pregnancy tests, a federal court judge in New York recently held.
The Manatt-sponsored and chaired Institute of Sports Law and Ethics (ISLE) has started a campaign against heading in soccer by children under 14 because of the scientifically-based risks that recent research has disclosed.
The California Supreme Court continued its complicated relationship with employment agreements and arbitration on June 23 when it issued Iskanian v. CLS Transportation.
Today, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, Inc.
Recognizing the potential long-term value of EHRs for improving care and reducing costs, many hospitals considered offering physicians financial support to purchase EHR software and related health IT items and services.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ordered the largest real estate company in Alabama to pay $500,000 for allegedly inadequate disclosures to consumers during the home-buying process.