Breaking News

Fry v. Rand Construction Corp.

Pending petition
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
20-861 4th Cir. TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

Issues: (1) Whether the lower court erred in adopting what is, in essence, a “sole cause” standard for a “but-for” cause, in direct conflict with the Supreme Court’s holdings in Burrage v. United States and Bostock v. Clayton County; and (2) whether the correct causation standard for petitioner Arlene Fry's Family and Medical Leave Act claim is but-for, motivating factor or negative factor.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Dec 23 2020Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 29, 2021)
Jan 15 2021Waiver of right of respondent Rand Construction Corporation to respond filed.
Jan 20 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/19/2021.
Jan 25 2021Response Requested. (Due February 24, 2021)
Feb 08 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 24, 2021 to March 26, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
Feb 09 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 26, 2021.
Mar 26 2021Brief of respondent Rand Construction Corporation in opposition filed.
Apr 08 2021Reply of petitioner Arlene Fry filed.
Apr 14 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/30/2021.