Law & Courts

WASHINGTON — U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes announced a formal inquiry Friday into whether Justice Department and Interior officials misrepresented the administration's plans for East Potomac Golf Links in Washington. She opened the hearing by reading D.C. Bar Rule 3.3 on candor to the court. She then questioned Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. Government lawyers had said for months that no closure plan was final. They acknowledged this week that the course is slated to close Nov. 15 under a renovation plan sent to the National Capital Planning Commission. Reyes said a special master with full investigatory powers may lead the probe, and if the government objects she will conduct it herself. She ordered officials to preserve documents. She stressed that no misconduct has been found. The government has appealed her earlier order halting tree-clearing. The suit was brought by the DC Preservation League and two golfers.

NASHVILLE — The Tennessee Supreme Court announced it will not change its regulations that bar nonlawyers from engaging in the practice of law or the 'law business' in the state. The decision came after the court weighed possible updates to its attorney-licensing rules. Law.com reported the outcome on Oct. 20 under a headline describing it as a rejection of private-equity ownership of law firms. A senior executive at the Attorneys' Liability Assurance Society, a lawyer-focused malpractice insurer, called the order a positive development from the insurer's perspective. Other states have considered or adopted looser ownership structures, and Tennessee's order keeps the traditional lawyer-only model in place for now. Lawyers in the state should expect no change to rules governing who may own or share in fees from a law practice.

WASHINGTON — A law-firm alert from Troutman Pepper Locke describes where tariff recovery stands. The Supreme Court held the IEEPA tariffs unlawful in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump. The Court of International Trade ruled in May that the 10 percent global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 exceeded presidential authority, but it limited relief to three plaintiffs, including Washington state. The Federal Circuit has stayed that judgment while it hears the appeal. In June the appeals court said the government was likely to win on the merits. It also found that refunds with interest would cure any harm from payments made in the meantime. Section 122 allows tariffs of up to 15 percent for no more than 150 days. A separate challenge to Section 301 forced-labor tariffs was argued Sept. 30. Supplemental briefs were due Oct. 16.