|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-1447||Fla S. Ct.||Jan 15, 2013||Jun 25, 2013||5-4||Alito||OT 2012|
Holding: The government’s demand for property from a land-use permit applicant must satisfy the Nollan /Dolan requirements even when it denies the permit.
Judgment: Reversed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Alito on June 25, 2013. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, and Justice Sotomayor joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 20 2012||Application (11A909) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from April 3, 2012 to June 1, 2012, submitted to Justice Thomas.|
|Mar 30 2012||Application (11A909) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until June 1, 2012.|
|May 30 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 2, 2012)|
|Jun 22 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including August 1, 2012.|
|Aug 1 2012||Brief of respondent St. Johns River Water Management District in opposition filed.|
|Aug 14 2012||Reply of petitioner Coy A. Koontz, Jr. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 15 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 24, 2012.|
|Oct 1 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 5, 2012.|
|Oct 5 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Oct 31 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, January 15, 2013.|
|Nov 6 2012||Conditional consent to the fiing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Nov 8 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including November 21, 2012.|
|Nov 8 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including December 21, 2012.|
|Nov 13 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neitiher party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Nov 21 2012||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Nov 21 2012||Joint appendix (exhibits volume) filed.|
|Nov 21 2012||Brief of petitioner Coy A. Koontz, Jr. filed.|
|Nov 27 2012||Brief amici curiae of Association of Florida Community Developers, et al. filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Hillcrest Property, LLP filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief amicus curiae of American Civil Rigihts Union filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Land Use Institute, Ltd. filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Association of Home Builders, et al. filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief amici curiae of Atlantic Legal Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief amici curiae of Institute for Justice, et al. filed.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Owners' Counsel of America filed.|
|Dec 6 2012||CIRCULATED|
|Dec 21 2012||Brief of respondent St. Johns River Water Management District filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 27 2012||Brief amici curiae of Former Members of the National Research Council Committee on Mitigating Wetland Losses filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 28 2012||Brief amici curiae of National Governors Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 28 2012||Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 28 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Dec 28 2012||Brief amici curiae of American Planning Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 28 2012||Brief amici curiae of California, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 28 2012||Record received from the Supreme Court of Florida. (1 box)|
|Jan 4 2013||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Jan 8 2013||Reply of petitioner Coy A. Koontz, Jr. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 15 2013||Argued. For petitioner: Paul J. Beard, II, Sacramento, Cal. For respondent: Paul R. Q. Wolfson, Washington, D. C.; and Edwin S. Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Jun 25 2013||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas, JJ., joined. Kagan, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., joined.|
|Jul 29 2013||MANDATE ISSUED.|
Experts continue to analyze last week's Fulton decision. Here are the final pieces in our symposium.
Thomas Berg & Douglas Laycock on the future of free-exercise challenges: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/protecting-free-exercise-under-smith-and-after-smith/
Holly Hollman on the ruling's many unresolved questions: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/06/court-requires-religious-exemption-but-leaves-many-questions-unanswered/
The first two pieces in our symposium on yesterday's decision in Fulton v. Philadelphia are up. First, @JimOleske dissects the decision in light of the court's shadow-docket ruling in Tandon v. Newsom, which took a very different approach to free exercise.
Here’s @AHoweBlogger’s analysis on the Supreme Court’s major NCAA ruling today.
NCAA athletes win 9-0 on educational perks as Kavanaugh calls out ban on direct payments - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Monday reshaped the relationship between universities and the athletes who play college sports. ...
SCOTUSblog is hiring!
We're seeking a new blog manager -- a fun and fast-paced role that includes writing articles, tracking statistics, managing the content on our site, and helping to plan and execute all our news coverage of the court.
SCOTUSblog is hiring a new blog manager - SCOTUSblog
SCOTUSblog is seeking a new blog manager. We are looking for a smart, creative person who is fascinated by the ...
After the Supreme Court handed down three opinions this morning, 12 cases remain outstanding for this term. They include voting rights, student free speech, and anonymous donors. We expect more opinions on Wednesday, June 23 at 10:00 a.m. ET.
We will open the live blog at 9:45.
The third and final opinion of the day is in U.S. v. Arthrex. In a fragmented decision, the court holds that the appointment of administrative patent judges violated the Constitution’s appointments clause because they are not “inferior” officers. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-1434_ancf.pdf
NEW: In a victory for college athletes, SCOTUS unanimously invalidates a portion of the NCAA's "amateurism" rules. The court says the NCAA can no longer bar colleges from providing athletes with education-related benefits such as free laptops or paid post-graduate internships.
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.