Petitions to Watch | Conference of 12.4.09
This edition of "Petitions to Watch" features cases up for consideration at the Justices' next private conference on Friday, December 4. As always, it lists the petitions on the Court's paid docket that Tom has deemed to have a reasonable chance of being granted. Links to all previous editions are available in our SCOTUSwiki archive.
Docket: 08-1332; 08-1472
Title: USA Mobility Wireless, Inc. v. Quon; USA Mobility Wireless, Inc. v. Quon
08-1472: Whether a service provider is liable as a matter of law under the Stored Communications Act for disclosing to a subscriber of the service the contents of communications stored on the provider's computers, without the consent of the sender or recipient of the message.
- Opinion below (9th Circuit)
- Petition for certiorari (08-1332)
- Brief in opposition (08-1332; 08-1472)
- Petitioner’s reply (08-1332)
- Conditional cross-petition for certiorari (08-1472)
- Response to conditional cross-petition for certiorari (08-1472)
- Reply of cross-petitioners (08-1472)
- Amicus brief of the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties
Title: Ryan v. Scott
Issues: (1) Can the application of a state procedural rule be characterized as “inadequate” under the adequate-state-ground doctrine–and therefore unenforceable on federal habeas corpus review–based upon one Arizona appellate case that involved the application of a different rule to different factual and procedural circumstances? (2) Can a federal habeas court refuse to consider a state's procedural requirement that issues
be raised in the body of a brief, rather than in an appendix, in determining whether a petitioner has fairly presented his claims to the state's courts?
Title: Ricci v. Kamienski
Issues: What is the standard of review for a federal appellate court analyzing a sufficiency-of-evidence claim in a habeas petition under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, 28 U.S.C. §2254(d)(1)?