|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-1274||2d Cir.||Jan 8, 2013||Feb 27, 2013||9-0||Roberts||OT 2012|
Holding: The five-year statute of limitations for the SEC to bring a civil suit seeking penalties for securities fraud against investment advisers begins to tick when the fraud occurs, not when it is discovered.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on February 27, 2013.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 6 2012||Application (11A755) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 20, 2012 to March 22, 2012, submitted to Justice Ginsburg.|
|Feb 10 2012||Application (11A755) granted by Justice Ginsburg extending the time to file until March 22, 2012.|
|Mar 2 2012||Application (11A755) to extend further the time from March 22, 2012 to April 20, 2012, submitted to Justice Ginsburg.|
|Mar 7 2012||Application (11A755) granted by Justice Ginsburg extending the time to file until April 20, 2012.|
|Apr 20 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 24, 2012)|
|May 15 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including June 25, 2012.|
|Jun 14 2012||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including July 25, 2012.|
|Jul 25 2012||Brief of respondent Securities and Exchange Commission in opposition filed.|
|Aug 8 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 24, 2012.|
|Aug 14 2012||Reply of petitioners Marc J. Gabelli and Bruce Alpert filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 10 2012||Supplemental brief of petitioner Marc J. Gabelli and Bruce Alpert filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 21 2012||Supplemental brief of petitioner Marc J. Gabelli and Bruce Alpert filed. (Distributed) (Second Supplemental)|
|Sep 25 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Oct 31 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, January 8, 2013.|
|Nov 2 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in suport of either party or of neither party, received from the Solicitor General on behalf of the respondent.|
|Nov 5 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioners.|
|Nov 9 2012||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Nov 9 2012||Brief of petitioners Marc J. Gabelli and Bruce Alpert filed.|
|Nov 13 2012||Record from the U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of New York is electronic.|
|Nov 16 2012||CIRCULATED.|
|Nov 16 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Association of the Bar of the City of New York filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 16 2012||Brief amicus curiae of American Bankers Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 16 2012||Brief amici curiae of Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 16 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 16 2012||Brief amicus curiae of DRI - The Voice of the Defense Bar filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 16 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 21 2012||Motion for leave to file amici brief out of time filed by Former SEC Commissioners and Officials.|
|Dec 3 2012||Motion for leave to file amici brief out of time filed by Former SEC Commissioners and Officials GRANTED.|
|Dec 4 2012||Record from U.S.C.A. for 2nd Circuit is electronic.|
|Dec 7 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Occupy the SEC filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 10 2012||Brief of respondent Securities and Exchange Commission filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 26 2012||Reply brief of petitioners Marc J. Gabelli and Bruce Alpert filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 7 2013||Letter from counsel for petitioners Marc J. Gabelli and Bruce Alpert filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 8 2013||Argued. For petitioners: Lewis J. Liman, New York, N. Y. For respondent: Jeffrey B. Wall, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Feb 27 2013||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Apr 1 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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.