|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-842||2d Cir.||Apr 21, 2014||Jun 16, 2014||7-1||Scalia||OT 2013|
Holding: The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 does not provide a foreign-sovereign judgment debtor with immunity from post-judgment discovery of information concerning its extraterritorial assets.
Judgment: Affirmed, 7-1, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on June 16, 2014.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 7 2013||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 8, 2013)|
|Feb 1 2013||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including March 11, 2013.|
|Mar 11 2013||Brief of respondent NML Capital, Ltd. in opposition filed.|
|Mar 26 2013||Reply of petitioner Republic of Argentina filed.|
|Mar 27 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 12, 2013.|
|Apr 15 2013||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.|
|Nov 22 2013||Supplemental brief of petitioner Republic of Argentina filed.|
|Dec 4 2013||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Dec 18 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 10, 2014.|
|Dec 18 2013||Supplemental brief of respondent NML Capital, Ltd. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 10 2014||Petition GRANTED.|
|Feb 11 2014||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, April 21, 2014|
|Feb 24 2014||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|Feb 24 2014||Brief of petitioner Republic of Argentina filed.|
|Feb 28 2014||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or neither party, received from counsel for respondent.|
|Mar 3 2014||Brief amici curiae of United States filed.|
|Mar 3 2014||Brief amicus curiae of The Clearing House filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 10 2014||CIRCULATED.|
|Mar 21 2014||Record received from U.S.C.A 2nd Circuit is electronic. (Update on 03/31/2014 record received from U.S.C.A 2nd Circuit is also electronic).|
|Mar 21 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Mar 26 2014||Brief of respondent NML Capital, Ltd. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 31 2014||Brief amici curiae of Competitive Enterprise Institute & Former State Department Officials filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of Aurelius Entities filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of South Carolina and 20 Other States filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of Family Members and Estates of Victims of State-Sponsored Terrorism filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of Montreux Partners, L.P., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of Additional Family Members of Victims of State-Sponsored Terrorism filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amicus curiae of The Hispanic American Center for Economic Research filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Manufacturers filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amicus curiae of Agudas Chasidei Chabad of United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of The Judicial Education Project and Professors of Law filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of Individual Bondholder Judgment Creditors filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amici curiae of Professors Lester Brickman and The Center for the Rule of Law filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 2 2014||Brief amicus curiae of The Judicial Crisis Network filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 14 2014||Reply of petitioner Republic of Argentina filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 18 2014||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 21 2014||Argued. For petitioner: Jonathan I. Blackman, New York, N. Y.; and Edwin S. Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondent: Theodore B. Olson, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 16 2014||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Scalia, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer, Alito, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion. Sotomayor, J., took no part in the decision of the case.|
|Jul 18 2014||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
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.
NEW: SCOTUS adds one new case to its docket for next term: Hemphill v. New York, a criminal-procedure case about the interaction between hearsay rules and the right of defendants to confront witnesses against them. Still no action on major petitions involving guns and abortion.
The court will release orders at 9:30 a.m. EDT followed by oral argument in two cases.
First, whether Alaska Native regional and village corporations are “Indian Tribes” for purposes of CARES Act Covid-related relief.
By @StanfordLaw’s Gregory Ablavsky.
Are Alaska Native corporations Indian tribes? A multimillion-dollar question - SCOTUSblog
Are Alaska Native corporations — special corporations that Congress created in 1971 when it resolved Native claims ...
It's official: In the first-ever SCOTUS bracketology tournament, our readers have chosen CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN as the greatest justice in history. The author of Brown v. Board, Loving v. Virginia, and Miranda v. Arizona defeated top-seeded John Marshall in the final round.
We've reached the final round of SCOTUS bracketology, and two illustrious chief justices are facing off for the championship. One wrote Marbury v. Madison. The other wrote Brown v. Board. Our full write-up on both finalists is here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/the-great-chief-and-the-super-chief-a-final-showdown-in-supreme-court-march-madness/
Cast your vote below!
NEW: The Supreme Court will issue opinion(s?) next Thursday April 22. We’re still waiting on decisions in the ACA case and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia about religious liberty and LGBT rights.
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.