Litigation Partner Joshua Voss was quoted in a Law 360 article on the implications of the decision in Delaware v. Pennsylvania, following the Supreme Court’s opinion in favor of Pennsylvania and several other states that challenged Delaware’s possession of $300 million in abandoned MoneyGram checks. Kleinbard is counsel for Pennsylvania Treasury in the ongoing litigation. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson held that the disputed checks are similar enough to money orders to come under the jurisdiction of a 1974 federal law governing unclaimed property. But now in the wake of the decision, some professionals are wondering the fate of common law priority rules under Texas v. New Jersey

“The issue of revisiting Texas v. New Jersey appears to be dead for the purposes of this case,” said Voss. “I wouldn’t say that for all time and all disputes, but certainly in this dispute.”

He also commented on the next phase of the ongoing case before the Supreme Court, where financial reconciliations must now be made in light of the recent opinion.

“Now that we know they owe us [the challenging states] the money, the question is how much to whom?” Voss said. “Some of which should be fairly straightforward, but I’ve been surprised before in this case.”

Click here to read the full article.