|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|13-339||4th Cir. _||Apr 23, 2014||Jun 9, 2014||7-2||Kennedy||OT 2013|
Holding: North Carolina’s statute of repose is not preempted by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), which instead only preempts state statutes of limitations on bringing state-law environmental tort cases.
Judgment: Reversed, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy on June 9, 2014. Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas and Justice Alito joined the opinion except as to Part II-D. Justice Scalia filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgement, in which Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Thomas, and Justice Alito joined. Justice Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Breyer joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 22 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Sep 13 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 18, 2013)|
|Oct 3 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 18, 2013.|
|Nov 14 2013||Brief of respondents Peter Waldburger, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Nov 25 2013||Reply of petitioner CTS Corporation filed.|
|Dec 4 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 10, 2014.|
|Jan 10 2014||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jan 22 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Jan 23 2014||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner CTS Corporation.|
|Feb 11 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, April 23, 2014|
|Feb 14 2014||Record received from U.S.D.C. Western District of North Carolina is electronic (Not on PACER).|
|Feb 18 2014||Record received from U.S.C.A. 4th Circuit. (1 - Envelope)|
|Feb 24 2014||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.|
|Feb 24 2014||Brief of petitioner CTS Corporation filed.|
|Feb 28 2014||Brief amicus curiae of DRI - Voice of the Defense Bar filed.|
|Mar 3 2014||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed.|
|Mar 3 2014||Brief amici curiae of American Chemistry Council, et al. filed.|
|Mar 10 2014||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 26 2014||Brief of respondents Peter Waldburger, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 31 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Apr 1 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Natural Resources Defense Council filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of Jerry Ensminger, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of Environmental Law Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 11 2014||Reply of petitioner CTS Corporation filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 18 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 23 2014||Argued. For petitioner: Brian J. Murray, Chicago, Ill.; and Joseph R. Palmore, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: John J. Korzen, Winston-Salem, N. C.|
|Jun 9 2014||Judgment REVERSED. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part II-D. Sotomayor and Kagan, JJ., joined that opinion in full, and Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, JJ., joined as to all but Part II-D. Scalia, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas and Alito, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, J., joined.|
|Jul 2 2014||Petition for Rehearing filed.|
|Jul 17 2014||DISTRIBUTED.|
|Aug 11 2014||Rehearing DENIED.|
|Aug 11 2014||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Aug 11 2014||Record returned for U.S.C.A. 4th Circuit.|
The clerk of the court just notified counsel in a juvenile sentencing case—that was sent back to a lower court this week in light of the court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi—that Justice Kagan unwittingly failed to recuse herself after participating in part of the case as SG.
It’s a quiet week, so now is a great time to listen to Judge John Owens regale @AHoweBlogger with the tale of Ashton Embry and the greatest leak in Supreme Court history.
Come for the high drama, stay for the good humor and an RBG story or two.
The biggest leak in Supreme Court history - SCOTUSblog
In a city full of anonymous sources, the Supreme Court is famously leak-proof. But a century ago, the court had ...
The US Supreme Court should overturn the Facebook’s “Oversight Board’s” “ruling” which upholds the outlawing of the 45th President of the United States from social media.
This is a big tech, corporate oligarchy without standing and it’s gone too far. Enough is enough.
The Supreme Court will hear its last case of the term today at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Here’s a summary of Terry v. United States in a TikTok minute.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will tackle the legacy of the Reagan-era War on Drugs and Congress' attempt to reduce the punishment disparity between crack-cocaine and powder cocaine offenses.
As @ekownyankah notes, this case has a little bit of everything.
In final case the court will hear this term, profound issues of race, incarceration and the war on drugs - SCOTUSblog
Academics naturally believe that even obscure cases in their field are underappreciated; each minor tax or bankruptcy ...
JUST IN: Another shadow-docket filing in which a church argues that state COVID-related restrictions lack sufficient carveouts for religious worship. This one challenges Colorado's restrictions. It relies heavily on last month's ruling in Tandon v. Newsom.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.