Briefly Noted

The appellants originally brought this case against the World Bank Group's financing arm, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), alleging that IFC negligently funded (via a company based in India) a power project in India that damaged the appellants' environment, health, and livelihoods. The issue of whether IFC was immune from suit under the International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945 went to the Supreme Court, which decided in 2019 that international organizations enjoy the same immunity from suit that foreign governments enjoy under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act—meaning that they can be sued in the U.S. if their actions fall within one of the exceptions to the FSIA, including the exception for “commercial activities.” The Supreme Court's decision was published in full in Volume 58, Issue 3 of International Legal Materials. This was a reversal from existing jurisprudence, which had held that international organizations (unlike foreign governments) had near-absolute immunity from lawsuits under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and the International Organizations Immunities Act. The case was remanded to the D.C. District Court, which dismissed the complaint in February 2020 because the “gravamen” of the complaint occurred outside the U.S., rendering the commercial activities exception inapplicable. Budha Jam et al. appealed that decision to the D.C. Circuit Court, which affirmed the lower court's decision in July 2021. The Court rejected the appellants' argument that the significant activity was IFC decision-making in the U.S., agreeing with the District Court that the gravamen of the complaint occurred outside the U.S.

Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015

Chapter 14 tells the story of how Jim Obergefell, whose husband John Arthur was dying, sued the state of Ohio to try to force the state to list Obergefell as the husband on Arthur’s death certificate. Ohio was one of many states whose constitution explicitly rejected recognition of same-sex marriages, wherever they were originally celebrated. Obergefell won in federal district court, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals consolidated his case with DeBoer v. Snyder from Michigan and cases from two other states, and overturned them all. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision of 2015 made marriage equality the law of the U.S. After the Obergefell victory, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse were legally married in Michigan and then cross-adopted their children.

Ninth Circuit Nursery

Based on statistical and textual analysis of the 148 patent cases heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals from its creation through 1925, this chapter suggests that the appeals judges created a legal environment highly favorable to innovative West Coast enterprises. Their rulings consistently sided with local patent holders and alleged infringers over litigants from outside the circuit. Cases involving only local parties produced more mixed results, as judges sought to mediate disputes among competing regional suppliers, while insulating small proprietors from risks of infringement. Through these means, the appeals court actively shaped competition and influenced the course of innovation in such emergent fields as oil drilling and refining, hydraulic machinery, and food processing. The distinctiveness of Pacific Coast patent law diminished after 1915 under influence of a federal judiciary stacked with protégés of ex-President William Howard Taft, who became Chief Justice in 1921.

Le marché des produits vivriers et développement socio-économique dans l’Arrondissement de Sa’a (Région du Centre, Cameroun)

L’économie rurale de bon nombre de pays en Afrique subsaharienne est essentiellement basée sur les activités agricoles. La crise économique des années 1980 qui a causé la baisse des prix des cultures de rente, a amené les agriculteurs à se lancer massivement dans les cultures vivrières. C’est ainsi que les campagnes sont devenues des lieux de ravitaillement pour les villes environnantes. L’objectif de cet article est d’évaluer l’apport du marché des produits vivriers au développement socio-économique de l’Arrondissement de Sa’a. Pour cela, l’étude s’est appuyée sur une recherche documentaire, des observations directes sur le terrain, des enquêtes par questionnaires auprès d’un échantillon de 425 acteurs intervenant dans la chaine de production, de transport, de commercialisation et de consommation des produits vivriers. Des entretiens semi-structurés ont aussi été réalisés avec les responsables des services déconcentrés du Ministère de l’Agriculture et du Développement Rural et les autorités de la Commune de Sa’a. Il ressort des analyses effectuées que le marché de Sa’a accueille un flux important de produits vivriers qui proviennent des différents bassins de production . Plusieurs acteurs interviennent à des différents niveaux dans le marché des produits vivriers à Sa’a. L’on a d’une part les commerçants parmi lesquels on retrouve les productrices-commerçantes, les immigrés saisonniers, les colportrices ou collectrices, les grossistes, les revendeuses et les détaillantes. D’autre part, l’on distingue les non commerçants qui regroupent les transporteurs, les consommateurs et les pouvoirs publics. Ces produits vivriers sont commercialisés à travers un circuit court, intermédiaire ou long. Leur commercialisation concerne beaucoup plus les femmes et génère des bénéfices qui vont de 3000 à 60000 FCFA pour les commerçantes, et 15000 à 35000FCFA en moyenne pour les transporteurs par moto taxi le jour du « grand marché ». Ces revenus enregistrés leur permettent d’augmenter leur capital et d’investir dans d’autres activités plus décentes et rentables. La Commune de Sa’a fait également des recettes importantes le jour du «grand marché». Les recettes collectées lui permettent de construire des infrastructures sociales. Il est donc important de le prendre en compte dans les politiques de développement parce qu’il représente un atout non négligeable pour le développement local.

Virginia

This Article addresses developments in Virginia oil and gas law for the period from September 1, 2019, to September 1, 2020. During this period, the Supreme Court of the United States heard the Atlantic Coast Pipeline case, providing a significant ruling that allowed the pipeline to cross underneath the Appalachian trail. Additionally, Judge Chadwick S. Dotson of the Circuit Court of Wise County and the City of Norton issued an opinion regarding the mining of uranium in the Commonwealth.

Alabama

Between October 2019 and September 2020, there were no noteworthy appellate decisions interpreting Alabama law directly relevant to oil and gas companies or operations. Similarly, there are no statutory amendments or administrative decisions impacting oil and gas companies operating in the state. However, the Alabama Supreme Court and the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals each issued an opinion addressing jurisdiction and procedural issues that are relevant to operators in Alabama. We discuss those opinions below.

FOIA's Got 99 Problems, and Circuit Court Disagreement About Authority to Compel Affirmative Disclosures Is Definitely One

N/A