|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-63||9th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2013|
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).
|Date||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.|
|Jul 9 2013||Application (12A1161) denied by Justice Kennedy.|
|Jul 11 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 12, 2013)|
|Aug 5 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including August 28, 2013, for all respondents.|
|Aug 12 2013||Brief amicus curiae of NACS - National Association of Convenience Stores filed.|
|Aug 28 2013||Brief of respondent JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., successor-in-interest to Bank One, N.A. in opposition filed.|
|Sep 10 2013||Reply of petitioners Pamela Brennan, et al. filed.|
|Sep 11 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 30, 2013.|
|Oct 7 2013||Petition DENIED. Justice Breyer and Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.|
Quick Tok explainer on yesterday’s voting rights case at the Supreme Court—Merrill v. Milligan.
The Mar-a-Lago case arrives at the Supreme Court. Here's an explainer on today's filing from @katieleebarlow, who notes that this isn't the first time Trump has asked the justices to intervene in fights over sensitive documents. (Both other times, the court ruled against him.)
In today's Voting Rights Act case, the conservative majority seemed likely to side with Alabama, though perhaps on narrower grounds than the state asked for. Here's @AHoweBlogger's analysis, plus courtroom sketches from Bill Hennessy (AKA @Artisbest).
Conservative justices seem poised to uphold Alabama’s redistricting plan in Voting Rights Act challenge - SCOTUSblog
In February, a divided Supreme Court temporarily blocked a ruling by a three-judge district court in Alabama, which ...
BREAKING: Donald Trump's lawyers have filed an emergency request asking the Supreme Court to intervene in the case over classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Trump wants SCOTUS to vacate a Sept. 21 ruling by the 11th Circuit. Here is the filing: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/22A283.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: voting rights and veterans' benefits.
First up is Merrill v. Milligan, a case about Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and how to decide if a state's redistricting plan dilutes Black voting power. @AHoweBlogger explains:
When are majority-Black voting districts required? In Alabama case, the justices will review that question. - SCOTUSblog
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act bars election practices that result in a denial or abridgement of the right ...