|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-135||3d Cir.||Mar 25, 2013||Jun 10, 2013||9-0||Kagan||OT 2012|
Holding: When an arbitrator determines that the parties to an arbitration intended to authorize class-wide arbitration, that determination survives judicial review under § 10(a)(4) of the Federal Arbitration Act as long as the arbitrator was arguably construing the contract.
Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on June 10, 2013. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion in which Justice Thomas joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jul 27 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 30, 2012)|
|Aug 1 2012||Waiver of right of respondent John Ivan Sutter to respond filed.|
|Aug 15 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 24, 2012.|
|Aug 21 2012||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America.|
|Aug 29 2012||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by DRI - The Voice of the Defense Bar.|
|Sep 6 2012||Response Requested . (Due October 9, 2012)|
|Oct 1 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 8, 2012.|
|Nov 6 2012||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including November 15, 2012.|
|Nov 15 2012||Brief of respondent John Ivan Sutter in opposition filed.|
|Nov 20 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 7, 2012.|
|Nov 20 2012||Reply of petitioner Oxford Health Plans LLC filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 7 2012||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America GRANTED.|
|Dec 7 2012||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by DRI - The Voice of the Defense Bar GRANTED.|
|Dec 7 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jan 7 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, March 25, 2013|
|Jan 8 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Jan 9 2013||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Jan 22 2013||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs received.)|
|Jan 22 2013||Brief of petitioner Oxford Health Plans LLC filed.|
|Jan 22 2013||Record received from U.S.C.A. for 3rd Circuit is electronic.|
|Jan 22 2013||Record from U.S.D.C. for the District of New Jersey is electronic.|
|Jan 23 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation filed.|
|Jan 28 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Jan 28 2013||Brief amicus curiae of New England Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 29 2013||Brief amicus curiae of DRI - The Voice of the Defense Bar filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 29 2013||Brief amicus curiae of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 29 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Equal Employment Advisory Council filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 21 2013||Brief of respondent John Ivan Sutter filed. (Distributed)|
|Feb 28 2013||Brief amici curiae of American Medical Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 18 2013||Reply of petitioner Oxford Health Plans LLC filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 25 2013||Argued. For petitioner: Seth P. Waxman, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Eric D. Katz, Roseland, N. J.|
|Jun 10 2013||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Alito, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined.|
|Jul 12 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.