Rule 37(e) and Spoliation Sanctions Under the Amended Rules
Time to Think About the H-1B Cap Season and Your Employment Needs
Please use the form below to search for any relevant publications pertaining to your specific needs. If you would like to be added to Kramer Levin's publications distribution list, please click onto the Publications Sign Up in the right side bar.
An article in the National Law Journal about the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to hear arguments in Chaidez v. United States quoted an amicus brief Kramer Levin filed on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. The arguments will address whether the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, which held lawyers constitutionally obligated to advise non-citizen clients about the immigration consequences of plea-based convictions, applies retroactively to convictions that were final before Padilla was announced. Lower federal courts are divided over the issue. The Kramer Levin brief, filed in support of the position that Padilla applies retroactively, was quoted from as saying the division over the issue causes “deeply unjust and damaging” inequities that separate families, and “a regrettable disuniformity of federal immigration law." Litigation partners Jeffrey S. Trachtman and Dani R. James; Litigation associate Craig L. Siegel; Land Use associate Cynthia Lovinger Siderman; and Litigation law clerk Jennifer E. Batterton, authored the brief.