About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [i] (Spring 2026)

handle is hein.ali/rstotelwti0007 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2026 Citations TORTS 3D: REMEDIES (DRAFTS) CHAPTER 1. COMPENSATORY DAMAGES TOPIC 1. GENERAL RULES FOR MEASURING COMPENSATORY DAMAGES § 3. One Satisfaction (No Double Recovery) C.A.D.C.2025. Subsec. (a) quot. in ftn. (quoting § 3 of T.D. No. 1, 2022). Native American tribe sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, alleging that the government failed to compensate tribe on a lease for both depreciation costs of a tribe-operated drug-treatment building as well as for the principal and interest on the loan that tribe obtained to purchase the building. The district court granted the government's motion for summary judgment, concluding that the depreciation payments and principal-and-interest payments were duplicative under the relevant federal statute. This court affirmed, holding that tribe was compensated for the cost of using its facility to deliver health services after it was made whole once, either by payment on depreciation of the building or on the principal and interest on the underlying loan, and this aligned with the common law understanding of compensation and compensatory damages as set forth in Restatement Third of Torts: Remedies § 3(a). Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, 145 F.4th 90, 95. § 4. Descriptive Categories of Damages (Immediate, Consequential, Direct, General, and Special Damages) C.A.10, 2025. Com. (b) quot. in conc. and diss. op. (T.D. No. 1, 2022). National Labor Relations Board filed a complaint against film-production companies, alleging that companies violated the National Labor Relations Act by unlawfully interrogating and threatening employees for engaging in union activity and by failing to reinstate employees who went on strike to protest unfair labor practices. An administrative lawjudge ordered companies to cease and desist from committing unfair labor practices and awarded the striking employees backpay and damages for other direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms suffered from being unlawfully discharged. This court denied in part companies' petition for review, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider whether the Board had authority under the Act to award certain damages to employees, because companies failed to adequately object to the Board's grant of that remedy. A concurring and dissenting opinion argued that the Board exceeded its authority in COPYRIGHT C2026 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.