Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

October Term 2015 (view source)

Revision as of 04:42, August 9, 2015

308 bytes added ,  04:42, August 9, 2015
Spokeo v. Robins, No. 13-1339, to address whether Congress may create Article III standing for plaintiffs who do not suffer any concrete and thus who could not otherwise attain standing in federal court, by authorizing a private right of action based on a
Line 18: Line 18:  
:::Vermont, like many other States, requires health care providers and health care payers to provide claims data and related information to the State's health care database. The law applies to all public and private entities that pay for health care services, including insurers, government programs, and third-party administrators. The State relies on the database to inform health care policy. The question presented is:
 
:::Vermont, like many other States, requires health care providers and health care payers to provide claims data and related information to the State's health care database. The law applies to all public and private entities that pay for health care services, including insurers, government programs, and third-party administrators. The State relies on the database to inform health care policy. The question presented is:
 
::::Did the Second Circuit -in a 2-1 panel decision that disregarded the considered opinion advanced by the United States as amicus - err in holding that [[ERISA]] preempts Vermont's health care database law as applied to the third-party administrator for a self-funded ERISA plan?  
 
::::Did the Second Circuit -in a 2-1 panel decision that disregarded the considered opinion advanced by the United States as amicus - err in holding that [[ERISA]] preempts Vermont's health care database law as applied to the third-party administrator for a self-funded ERISA plan?  
 +
*Spokeo v. Robins, No. 13-1339, to address whether Congress may create Article III standing for plaintiffs who do not suffer any concrete and thus who could not otherwise attain standing in federal court, by authorizing a private right of action based on a violation of a federal statute without any injury.
    
Perhaps surprisingly, there are no [[Fourth Amendment]] cases among the 35.
 
Perhaps surprisingly, there are no [[Fourth Amendment]] cases among the 35.
Aschlafly
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,231

edits

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:MobileDiff/1167855"

Navigation menu