Issue: (1) Whether MoneyGram Official Checks are “a money order, traveler’s check, or other similar written instrument (other than a third party bank check) on which a banking or financial organization or a business association is directly liable,” pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 2503; (2) whether the court should command Wisconsin and Pennsylvania not to assert any claim over abandoned and unclaimed property related to MoneyGram Official Checks; and (3) whether all future sums payable on abandoned MoneyGram Official Checks should be remitted to Delaware
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 25 2016||Documents filed with the Special Master may be found on the Special Master's website at http://ww2.ca2.uscourts.gov/specialmaster/special_145.html|
|May 26 2016||Motion for leave to file a bill of complaint filed.|
|Jun 03 2016||Brief and Motion for Leave to file Counterclaim filed by Wisconsin.|
|Jun 14 2016||Brief in response of defendant Pennsylvania filed.|
|Jun 21 2016||Letter from State of Wisconsin received.|
|Jun 23 2016||Reply of petitioner Delaware, Plaintiff filed.|
|Jul 06 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Moneygram Payment Systems, Inc. filed.|
|Aug 01 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Unclaimed Property Professionals Organization filed.|
|Aug 24 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 26, 2016.|
|Oct 03 2016||The Motion for leave to file a Bill of Complaint and the Motion for leave to file a Counterclaim are granted. This case is consolidated with Original 146 and the parties are allowed thirty days within which to file answers to the Bills of Complaint and the Counterclaims.|
|Oct 10 2016||Motion For leave to amend Bill of Compliant filed by Arkansas, et al.,. (NOT PRINTED) (VIDED)|
|Oct 28 2016||Pennsylvania's Answer and Counterclaims to Delaware's Bill of Complaint filed. (VIDED)|
|Oct 31 2016||Answer of the State of Wisconsin to the Bill of Complaint filed.(VIDED)|
|Nov 01 2016||Answer to Wisconsin's Counterclaim filed by Delaware (VIDED)|
|Nov 01 2016||Answer to Counterclaim filed by Arkansas, et al., Plaintiffs. (VIDED)|
|Nov 01 2016||Answer to Arkansas, et al.'s Bill of Complaint filed by Delaware filed. (VIDED)|
|Nov 07 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 22, 2016.|
|Nov 11 2016||Motion for leave to file bill of third party complaint filed by defendant Pennsylvania. (VIDED).|
|Nov 18 2016||Answer to Pennsylvania's Counterclaim filed by Delaware.(VIDED)|
|Nov 28 2016||The motion of Arkansas, et al., for leave to amend the Bill of Complaint is granted.|
|Dec 06 2016||It has been suggested that the parties are in agreement on the facts relevant to a decision in this action. If this is the case, the parties are invited to file a stipulation of facts in this Court on or before 60 days from the date of this order. If such a stipulation is filed, the Court will set a schedule for briefing the legal issues. If such a stipulation is not timely filed, a Special Master will be appointed to conduct any necessary discovery and to make proposed findings of fact, and the case will proceed in the usual manner.|
|Dec 28 2016||Brief of MoneyGram Payment Systems, Inc. in opposition to Motion for Leave to File Bill of Third Party Complaint filed. VIDED.|
|Jan 09 2017||Motion for leave to amend Bill of Complaint filed by Delaware, Plaintiff. (VIDED)|
|Jan 09 2017||Motion for leave to amend Countercliam filed by defendant Delaware, (VIDED)|
|Jan 11 2017||Reply of respondent Pennsylvania in further support of motion for leave to file Bill of Third Party Complaint filed. VIDED.|
|Jan 18 2017||Response to Delaware's Motion for Leave to Amend Bill of Complaint from Defendant Pennsylvania filed.(VIDED)|
|Jan 24 2017||Response in opposition to Delaware's motion for leave to amend bill of complaint from Wisconsin filed.(VIDED)|
|Jan 26 2017||Response in opposition to Delaware's motion for leave to amend counterclaim from Arkansas, et al., filed.(VIDED)|
|Feb 01 2017||Letter from the Parties in Response to Court's order of December 6, 2016.(VIDED)|
|Feb 03 2017||Reply Brief in support of Motions for leave to amend Bill of Complaint and Counterclaim filed by Delaware, (VIDED)|
|Feb 15 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 3, 2017.|
|Mar 29 2017||It is ordered that the Honorable Pierre N. Leval, of New York, New York, is appointed Special Master in this case with authority to fix the time and conditions for the filing of additional pleadings, to direct subsequent proceedings, to summon witnesses, to issue subpoenas, and to take such evidence as may be introduced and such as he may deem it necessary to call for. The Special Master is directed to submit Reports as he may deem appropriate. The cost of printing his Reports, and all other proper expenses, including travel expenses, shall be submitted to the Court.|
|Mar 31 2017||Oath of Special Master filed|
|Jul 27 2021||First Interim Report of the Special Master received.|
|Jul 27 2021||Because the Court has consolidated this case with No. 146, Original, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 145, Original. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 145. Each document submitted in connection with one or both of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in only one of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”|
#SCOTUS announces that it will hold a formal, although "purely ceremonial," investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett next Friday. Attendance at the ceremony is by invitation only, & press coverage will be pooled. Full announcement is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-24-21
Need a refresher on "cert before judgment" practice at SCOTUS? We've got you covered.
@steve_vladeck examined the practice (among other types of extraordinary relief) in 2018: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/12/power-versus-discretion-extraordinary-relief-and-the-supreme-court/
And Kevin Russell wrote a detailed explainer in 2011:
Abortion providers in Texas return to Supreme Court, now asking the justices for immediate review on the merits of their challenge to the state’s six-week abortion ban (cert. before judgment)
The Supreme Court will have a new oral argument procedure when they return to the bench Oct. 4. There will be an opportunity for individual questioning by each justice in order of seniority.
Interesting new procedure for oral arguments when the justices return to in-person arguments next month. Does it increase the chances that we will continue to hear from Justice Thomas, who was an active participant using the taking-turns format? https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1440318536723812363
NEW: The Supreme Court just released its December argument calendar. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the term's big abortion case, will be argued Dec. 1.
#SCOTUS will hear oral argument in Mississippi abortion case challenging Roe v. Wade on Dec. 1. Full December argument calendar is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2021.pdf
We noted yesterday that Justice Thomas was speaking at Notre Dame but that there was no livestream. A video of his speech is now posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kb4bFYdujA
Thomas criticized the media and defended the court's independence. Seems to be a theme among the justices lately.
💥 Breyer continues book tour (including @colbertlateshow two nights ago).
💥 Barrett gave a speech Sunday @uofl.
💥 Thomas is slated to give the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture today @NotreDame (but, like Barrett's speech, there is apparently no livestream).
Incidentally, Gorsuch had been scheduled to give a speech at the University of Wyoming today, but his visit was canceled due to COVID.
Nothing from Kagan or Gorsuch though 😢 https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1438530948207874050