Issue: Whether a plaintiff who purchases directly from a
member of a price-fixing conspiracy is necessarily a “direct
purchaser” under Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois(as the Third and
Seventh Circuits have held), or whether instead the
plaintiff must show that the conspirators agreed to set
the specific price the plaintiff paid and not merely that
the conspiracy inflated that price by anticompetitive
means (as the Ninth Circuit held below).
Proceedings and Orders
May 31 2013
Application (12A1161) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 11, 2013 to July 11, 2013, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
Jun 4 2013
Application (12A1161) granted by Justice Kennedy extending the time to file until July 11, 2013.
Jul 1 2013
Application (12A1161) to extend further the time from July 11, 2013 to August 9, 2013, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
On Monday, the justices met for their September 26 conference. They issued orders from this conference on Thursday. The court granted certiorari in nine cases, consolidating two. The October sitting will begin on October 3; the argument calendar for that sitting is available on the court's website.
Bank of America Corp. v. City of Miami (1) Whether, by limiting suit to “aggrieved person[s],” Congress required that a Fair Housing Act plaintiff plead more than just Article III injury-in-fact; and (2) whether proximate cause requires more than just the possibility that a defendant could have foreseen that the remote plaintiff might ultimately lose money through some theoretical chain of contingencies.
Moore v. Texas (1) Whether it violates the Eighth Amendment and this Court’s decisions in Hall v. Florida and Atkins v. Virginia to prohibit the use of current medical standards on intellectual disability, and require the use of outdated medical standards, in determining whether an individual may be executed.
Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado Whether a no-impeachment rule constitutionally may bar evidence of racial bias offered to prove a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury.
BeavEx Inc. v. Costello Whether the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act preempts generally-applicable state laws that force motor carriers to treat and pay all drivers as “employees” rather than as independent contractors.