|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-1307||10th Cir.||Jan 7, 2019||Mar 20, 2019||9-0||Breyer||OT 2018|
Holding: A business engaged in no more than nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings is not a “debt collector” under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, except for the limited purpose of enforcing security interests under 15 U. S. C. §1692f(6).
Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on March 20, 2019. Justice Sotomayor filed a concurring opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 13 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 16, 2018)|
|Apr 09 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 16, 2018 to May 16, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Apr 11 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 16, 2018.|
|May 16 2018||Brief of respondents McCarthy & Holthus LLP, et al. in opposition filed.|
|May 23 2018||Waiver of the 14-Day waiting period under Rule 15.5 filed by petitioner.|
|May 29 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018.|
|May 30 2018||Reply of petitioner Dennis Obduskey filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 11 2018||Rescheduled.|
|Jun 18 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/21/2018.|
|Jun 27 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/27/2018.|
|Jun 28 2018||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 16 2018||Joint motion for an extension of time to file the opening briefs on the merits filed.|
|Jul 23 2018||Joint motion to extend the time to file the opening briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 10, 2018. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including November 7, 2018.|
|Aug 08 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Dennis Obduskey.|
|Sep 04 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Respondents, McCarthy & Holthus LLP, et al..|
|Sep 10 2018||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Sep 10 2018||Brief of petitioner Dennis Obduskey filed.|
|Sep 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, INC filed.|
|Sep 17 2018||Brief amicus curiae of National Consumer Law Center filed.|
|Sep 17 2018||Brief amici curiae of Members of Congress filed.|
|Nov 07 2018||Brief of respondent McCarthy & Holthus LLP filed.|
|Nov 07 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Michigan Creditors Bar Association filed.|
|Nov 13 2018||Brief amicus curiae of National Creditors Bar Association filed.|
|Nov 13 2018||Amicus brief of Legal League 100 not accepted for filing. (November 15, 2018) (Duplicate submission)|
|Nov 14 2018||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Nov 14 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Legal League 100 filed.|
|Nov 14 2018||Brief amici curiae of Mortgage Bankers Association, et al. filed.|
|Nov 14 2018||Brief amici curiae of United Trustee's Association, et al. filed.|
|Nov 14 2018||Brief amicus curiae of The Commercial Law League of America filed.|
|Nov 14 2018||Brief amicus curiae of USFN - America's Mortgage Banking Attorneys filed.|
|Nov 14 2018||Brief amicus curiae of Colorado Mortgage Lenders Association filed.|
|Nov 14 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Nov 28 2018||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, January 7, 2019|
|Nov 30 2018||CIRCULATED|
|Dec 03 2018||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Dec 07 2018||Reply of petitioner Dennis Obduskey filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 11 2018||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit.|
|Dec 11 2018||Record from the U.S.C.A. 10th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Jan 07 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Daniel L. Geyser, Dallas, Tex. For respondent: Kannon K. Shanmugam, Washington, D. C.; and Jonathan C. Bond, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Mar 20 2019||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Sotomayor, J., filed a concurring opinion.|
|Apr 22 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...
I really enjoyed getting to chat with the incomparable @AHoweBlogger about (1) why #SCOTUS's "shadow docket" *is* a big deal; (2) why it's so hard to figure out how to include it in broader assessments of the Justices' work; and (3) some possible ways to include it going forward. https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1417545384314949635
How do you solve a problem like the shadow docket? @steve_vladeck has some thoughts and shared them with @AHoweBlogger in the latest SCOTUStalk.
The Supreme Court has rescinded its COVID-related orders related to filing, but no word on resuming in-person oral arguments in October.
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.