From Bloomberg:
AN UNDER-THE-RADAR case slated for argument before the US Supreme Court on Tuesday could leave federal regulations vulnerable to legal challenges long after they are codified, Lydia Wheeler reports.
- When Does the Clock Start? The central issue is a timing question related to the six-year statute of limitations for challenging regulations under the Administrative Procedure Act: Does the clock start when the rule is adopted or when it first causes legal harm?
- Corner Post, a North Dakota truck stop, is one of the parties challenging the Federal Reserve’s 2011 debit card swipe fee regulation—but it didn’t start out that way when the case began in 2021.
- Trade groups challenging the regulation added the truck stop as a party after the federal government said the groups’ suit was barred by the statute of limitations and had to be dismissed. Corner Post’s legal team argues that because the business didn’t open until 2018, it would have no way of suing to address an alleged injury if the statute of limitations window starts when a final rule is issued.
- ‘Sleeper Case': While Corner Post isn’t as high profile as two already-argued challenges to the Chevron doctrine on agency interpretations of ambiguous laws, it may end up being just as consequential because a ruling in one could broaden the effect of the other. “This is a sleeper case that could really destabilize the regulatory regimes of all the regulatory agencies if the plaintiff wins,” said Daniel Jarcho, a partner in Alston & Bird’s litigation and trial practice group and a former Justice Department trial attorney
This should be an easy case if the US Supreme Court follows case law as applied to medical malpractice suits. In those cases, the clock does not start ticking when the injury occurs but when the claimant discovers the injury. The discovery can occur decades after the injury was incurred. Otherwise it’s a two-year statute of limitations.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.