Chemerinsky doesn’t sound optimistic about ‘King v. Burwell’

Wheels of justice grind…

Minnesota Litigator blog has a photo of footsteps through the snow that it says symbolize the withdrawal of Faegre Baker Daniels as local counsel for Exergy in the lawsuit brought against it by Fagen over construction of a wind farm project.  The latest development is Fagan’s response to an alleged meet and confer and other “offending proposed claims,” as stated by its attorney, Keith Moheban and others at Stinson Leonard Street.  It sounds like a mess, or, as Minnesota Litigator puts it, has a faint whiff of a potentially noxious quagmire.

Not cool, Bank of America

MinnPost reports that Bank of America has settled a loan discrimination case with a hearing-impaired Minnesota woman for $155,000.

Kathryn Letourneau of North Branch filed a complaint in 2012 with the Human Rights Department claiming that, due to a hearing impairment, she’d asked Bank of America to communicate with her solely through email on a $140,000 loan modification. At first, the bank complied with the request, but eventually stopped and then denied the loan modification.

While denying that it discriminated against Letourneau, Bank of America agreed to pay $145,000; two-thirds to Letourneau and one-third to her attorney, Gilbert Law. Another $10,000 goes to the state’s Dispute Resolution fund.

The bank also has agreed to change its practices in the future, with staff training in dealing with deaf customers.

It’s only health care for millions of people

Professor Erwin Chemerinsky has a run-up in the ABA Journal to tomorrow’s arguments in King v. Burwell, which could put paid to the Affordable Care Act. The argument is about whether the IRS can provide tax credits for health insurance purchased on a federally-facilitated exchange. Does the word “state” mean “state government only” or does it mean “state or federal government? The professor says the high court should look at the entire context of the law—but doesn’t sound very confident.