Civil rights - availability of section 1983 remedy - Eleventh Circuit holds that federal regulations requiring state Medicaid plans to provide transportation to and from providers do not create a right enforceable under section 1983

Article Abstract:

The US 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Harris v. James incorrectly held that a private right of action under section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 is not created by federal directives that state Medicaid plans assure transportation for beneficiaries. The court disregarded US Supreme Court precedent regarding interpretation of valid regulations by creating a burden on plaintiffs to establish Congressional intent to confer private rights of action. Administration of federal programs, which often depend upon private attempts to enforce federal mandates, may be harmed by this opinion.

Transportation, Medicaid, Civil rights

---

Contract law - shrinkwrap licenses - Seventh Circuit holds that shrinkwrap licenses are enforceable. - ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996)

Article Abstract:

The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit's ruling in ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg enforcing a computer software shrinkwrap license undermines the public's access to information in the public domain under federal copyright law. The Court found that Zeidenberg was bound to the shrinkwrap license on ProCD's product compiling telephone directories. It found that he breached the contact formed when he opened the package and that the contractual claim was not preempted by federal law. The Court has allowed software makers to circumvent copyright laws.

Software, Laws, regulations and rules, Copyright, Copyrights, Copyright licenses, Copyright licensing

---

Contract law - covenants not to compete - Pennsylvania Supreme Court holds that covenants not to compete are not assignable by default and are not enforceable to protect financial interests alone

Article Abstract:

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in Hess v. Gebhard & Co. that a noncompetition agreement between an insurance company and its employee no longer restricted the employee?after the business was sold.? The original owner of the business, which still had a financial interest, could not enforce the agreement because the agreement could not protect such an interest alone.

Non-competition agreements, Noncompete agreements

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Civil rights - availability of s. 1983 - Ninth Circuit holds that s. 1983 is available to enforce Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. - Freestone v. Cowan, 68 F.3d 1141 (9th Cir. 1995)
• Abstracts: Class actions - class certification of mass torts - Seventh Circuit overturns Rule 23(b)(3) certification of a plaintiff class of hemophiliacs. - In re Rhone-Poulenc Rorer, Inc., 51 F.3d 1293 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 184 (1995)

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.