|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-872||7th Cir.||Oct 7, 2013||Oct 15, 2013||n/a||Per Curiam||OT 2013|
Issue: Whether the Seventh Circuit erred in holding, in an acknowledged departure from the rule in at least four other circuits, that state and local government employees may avoid the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act’s comprehensive remedial regime by bringing age discrimination claims directly under the Equal Protection Clause and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Judgment: The writ of certiorari is dismissed at improvidently granted in a per curiam opinion on October 15, 2013.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 5 2012||Application (12A455) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 15, 2012 to January 14, 2013, submitted to Justice Kagan.|
|Nov 6 2012||Application (12A455) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until January 14, 2013.|
|Jan 14 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 15, 2013)|
|Feb 15 2013||Brief of respondent Harvey N. Levin in opposition filed.|
|Feb 15 2013||Brief amicus curiae of International Municipal Lawyers Association filed.|
|Feb 15 2013||Brief amici curiae of Michigan and Eleven Other States filed.|
|Feb 27 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 15, 2013.|
|Feb 27 2013||Reply of petitioners Lisa Madigan, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 18 2013||Petition GRANTED.|
|Apr 9 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of eitiher party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Apr 19 2013||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including June 3, 2013.|
|Apr 19 2013||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 2, 2013.|
|May 29 2013||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Lisa Madigan, et al.|
|Jun 3 2013||Brief of petitioners Lisa Madigan, et al. filed.|
|Jun 6 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioners.|
|Jun 10 2013||Brief amici curiae of National School Boards Association, et al. filed.|
|Jun 10 2013||Brief amici curiae of Michigan and Twenty Other States filed.|
|Jun 10 2013||Brief amici curiae of International Municipal Lawyers Association, et al. filed.|
|Jun 24 2013||Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioners GRANTED.|
|Jul 22 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Jul 23 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, October 7, 2013.|
|Aug 2 2013||Brief of respondent Harvey N. Levin filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 5 2013||Brief amici curiae of Law Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 9 2013||Brief amici curiae of American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 9 2013||Record from U.S.C.A. for 7th Circuit is electronic and is located on PACER. Record from U.S.D.C. for Northern District of Illinois is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Aug 9 2013||Brief amici curiae of AARP and National Senior Citizens Law Center filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 9 2013||Brief amicus curiae of National Education Association filed.|
|Sep 3 2013||Reply of petitioners Lisa Madigan, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 7 2013||Argued. For petitioners: Michael Scodro, Illinois Solicitor General, Chicago, Ill. For respondent: Edward R. Theobald, III, Chicago, Ill.|
|Oct 15 2013||Writ of certiorari DISMISSED as improvidently granted. Opinion per curiam.|
|Nov 18 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
NEW: The Supreme Court rules against the FTC in a dispute with a payday loan company over the extent of the FTC's authority to seek monetary restitution from companies engaged in deceptive practices. SCOTUS says 9-0 that FTC doesn't have that authority under the statute at issue.
NEW: The Supreme Court sides against the federal government and in favor of people who brought Social Security claims in a technical ruling about "exhaustion" rules (essentially, when in the bureaucratic process the claimants were required to raise certain legal arguments).
BREAKING: In 6-3 decision, SCOTUS declines to further limit the ability of states to sentence juveniles to life without parole. The court upholds the sentence of a Mississippi man who killed his grandfather when he was 15; says sentencing procedure did not violate 8th Amendment.
Supreme Court opinions in 15 minutes!
We’re LIVE right now discussing which opinions we could see today and answering your questions. Join us!
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, April 22 - SCOTUSblog
We will be live blogging on Thursday, April 22, as the court releases one or more opinions in argued cases. Th...
Today at the court:
A nuts-and-bolts question of civil procedure. After an appeal is decided, do courts have discretion to limit the administrative “costs” that the prevailing party can recover from the losing party?
Argument begins at 10:00 a.m. EDT.
Justices to consider awards of costs of appellate litigation - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com brings the justices a basic nuts-and-bolts question of...
In 2019, the Supreme Court limited the scope of a federal law that bans people convicted of felonies from having a gun. Up this morning at the court: back-to-back cases that will decide how many felon-in-possession convictions will need new trials or pleas under that 2019 ruling.
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.