|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-1165||2d Cir.||Nov 6, 2019||Jan 14, 2020||N/A||Per Curiam||OT 2019|
Holding: This case, about whether plaintiffs can state a claim against retirement-plan fiduciaries for breach of duty of prudence by alleging that the costs of undisclosed fraud grow over time, is vacated and remanded to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit for a determination on whether to consider two arguments raised in the briefs at the Supreme Court but not in the lower courts.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded in a per curiam opinion on January 14, 2020. Justice Kagan filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Ginsburg joined. Justice Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 04 2019||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 8, 2019)|
|Apr 01 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 8, 2019 to May 8, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Apr 04 2019||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 8, 2019.|
|Apr 08 2019||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Apr 18 2019||Brief of respondents Larry Jander, et al. in opposition filed.|
|May 06 2019||Reply of petitioners Retirement Plans Committee of IBM, et al. filed.|
|May 07 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.|
|May 28 2019||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/30/2019.|
|Jun 03 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 01 2019||Joint motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.|
|Jul 08 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, November 6, 2019.|
|Jul 11 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioners, Retirement Plans Committee of IBM, et al.|
|Jul 16 2019||Joint motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including August 6, 2019. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 24, 2019.|
|Aug 06 2019||Brief of petitioners Retirement Plans Committee of IBM, et al. filed.|
|Aug 06 2019||Joint appendix filed.|
|Aug 13 2019||Brief amicus curiae of the United States in support of neither party filed.|
|Aug 13 2019||Brief amici curiae of The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, and The Business Roundtable filed.|
|Aug 13 2019||Brief amicus curiae of DRI—The Voice of the Defense Bar filed.|
|Aug 13 2019||Brief amici curiae of American Benefits Council and ERISA Industry Committee filed.|
|Sep 03 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Sep 16 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit.|
|Sep 16 2019||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit it electronic.|
|Sep 24 2019||Brief of respondents Larry W. Jander, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 27 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Oct 01 2019||Brief amici curiae of American Association for Justice and Public Justice filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 01 2019||Brief amicus curiae of Occupy the SEC filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 01 2019||Brief amici curiae of Law Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 15 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 24 2019||Reply of petitioners Retirement Plans Committee of IBM, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 06 2019||Argued. For petitioners: Paul D. Clement, Washington, D. C. For United States, as amicus curiae: Jonathan Y. Ellis, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Samuel Bonderoff, New York, N. Y.|
|Jan 14 2020||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Kagan, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed a concurring opinion. Opinion per curiam.|
|Feb 18 2020||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.