Eversheds Sutherland 11th Circuit Business Blog
content top

Municipal Fair Housing Act Suit vs. Banks Is Again Green-Lighted

Capping off a busy week, the Eleventh Circuit took a second crack at whether a municipality can bring an action under the Fair Housing Act against banks to recover damages allegedly attributable to racially discriminatory lending practices. In the prior round, the court held that the City of Miami had alleged standing and causation sufficiently to survive a motion to dismiss. But the...

Laws for the People, By the People, Are Not Copyrightable

A March 23, 2017 order from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia immediately prompted headlines such as “If you publish Georgia’s state laws, you’ll get sued for copyright and lose.”  The case, Code Revision Commission v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., 244 F. Supp. 3d 1350 (N.D. Ga. 2017), examined whether the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (“O.C.G.A.”)...

Availability of Class Arbitration Is a “Question of Arbitrability” to Be Decided by a Court Absent a “Clear and Unmistakable Intent” to Delegate Arbitrability Questions to an Arbitrator

For the second time in as many months, the Eleventh Circuit addressed the question of who—a court or an arbitrator—decides whether an arbitration agreement allows for class arbitration. The court faced this question just last month in Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. Maizes, 899 F.3d 1230 (11th Cir. 2018), but its more recent decision in JPay, Inc. v. Kobel, 2018 WL 4472207 (11th Cir. Sept....

Keep the Change: Eleventh Circuit Rejects Cab Companies’ Constitutional Challenge to Rideshare Ordinance

The Eleventh Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of taxi companies’ claims that a Miami-Dade County ordinance permitting rideshare services to participate in the for-hire transportation market constituted a taking of the cab companies’ property and/or a denial to them of equal protection.  Checker Cab Operators, Inc. v. Miami-Dade County, 2018 WL 3721227 (11th Cir. Aug. 6, 2018). Before...

London or New York? Beware Inconsistent Dispute Resolution Provisions

Internaves de Mexico s.a. de C.V. v. Andromeda Steamship Corp., 2018 WL 3636427 (11th Cir. Aug. 1, 2018), demonstrates the perils (and costs) of inconsistency in an agreement’s dispute resolution provisions.  Internaves and Andromeda were parties to a “charter party” agreement for the transportation of an electric transformer from Brazil to Mexico.  The agreement, completed using a...

« Older Entries