|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-513||5th Cir.||Nov 1, 2016||Dec 6, 2016||8-0||Kennedy||OT 2016|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the respondents in this case.
Holding: A seal violation does not mandate dismissal of a relator's complaint under the False Claims Act.
Judgment: Affirmed, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy on December 6, 2016.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 20 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 20, 2015)|
|Nov 20 2015||Brief of respondents United States, ex rel. Cori Rigsby, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Nov 20 2015||Brief amicus curiae of The American Tort Reform Association filed.|
|Nov 20 2015||Brief amicus curiae of The Academy Advisors filed.|
|Nov 20 2015||Brief amici curiae of Washington Legal Foundation, and Allied Educational Foundation filed.|
|Nov 20 2015||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Nov 20 2015||Brief amicus curiae of The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Nov 30 2015||Reply of petitioner State Farm Fire and Casualty Company filed.|
|Dec 02 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 8, 2016.|
|Jan 11 2016||The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.|
|Apr 15 2016||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Apr 25 2016||Supplemental brief of petitioner State Farm Fire and Casualty Company filed.|
|May 03 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 19, 2016.|
|May 23 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 26, 2016.|
|May 31 2016||Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.|
|Jun 17 2016||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 29, 2016.|
|Jun 17 2016||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 12, 2016.|
|Jul 22 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondents.|
|Jul 29 2016||Joint appendix filed. (3 volumes).|
|Jul 29 2016||Brief of petitioner State Farm Fire and Casualty Company filed.|
|Jul 29 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Aug 05 2016||Brief amici curiae of The American Tort Reform Association, et al. filed.|
|Aug 05 2016||Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Aug 05 2016||Brief amici curiae of Washington Legal Foundation, and Allied Educational Foundation filed.|
|Aug 05 2016||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.|
|Aug 05 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Coalition for Government Procurement filed.|
|Aug 05 2016||Brief amicus curiae of DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar filed.|
|Sep 02 2016||SET FOR ARGUMENT On Tuesday, November 1, 2016|
|Sep 09 2016||Record has been requested from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit.|
|Sep 12 2016||Brief of respondents United States, ex rel. Cori Rigsby, et al. filed.|
|Sep 19 2016||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Sep 19 2016||Brief amicus curiae of National Whistleblower Center filed.|
|Sep 19 2016||Received from the U.S.D.C. Southern Dist. of Mississippi. (7 Boxes) a portion of the record is SEALED.|
|Sep 19 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Taxpayers Against Fraud Education Fund filed.|
|Sep 19 2016||Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Sep 28 2016||CIRCULATED|
|Oct 11 2016||Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 12 2016||Reply of petitioner State Farm Fire and Casualty Company filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 01 2016||Argued. For petitioner: Kathleen M. Sullivan, New York, N. Y. For respondents: Tejinder Singh, Bethesda, Md.; and John F. Bash, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Dec 06 2016||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jan 09 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Aug 07 2017||Record from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of Mississippi has been returned.|
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.