|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|18-489||9th Cir.||Apr 24, 2019||Jun 2, 2019||9-0||Breyer||OT 2018|
Holding: A creditor may be held in civil contempt for violating a bankruptcy court’s discharge order if there is no fair ground of doubt as to whether the order barred the creditor’s conduct.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on June 2, 2019.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 15 2018||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 15, 2018)|
|Oct 16 2018||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Bradley Weston Taggart.|
|Oct 26 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 15, 2018 to December 14, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.|
|Oct 29 2018||Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 14, 2018.|
|Nov 08 2018||Brief amici curiae of Honorable Eugene Wedoff (ret.), et al. filed.|
|Nov 15 2018||Brief amici curiae of National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center, et al. filed.|
|Dec 11 2018||Letter waiving the 14-day waiting period under Rule 15.5 filed.|
|Dec 14 2018||Brief of respondents Shelley Lorenzen, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Dec 19 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.|
|Dec 20 2018||Reply of petitioner Bradley Weston Taggart filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 04 2019||Petition GRANTED.|
|Feb 06 2019||Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Bradley Weston Taggart.|
|Feb 11 2019||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, April 24, 2019|
|Feb 19 2019||Joint appendix filed.|
|Feb 19 2019||Brief of petitioner Bradley Weston Taggart filed.|
|Feb 20 2019||Brief amici curiae of Honorable Eugene Wedoff (ret.), et al. filed.|
|Feb 26 2019||Brief amicus curiae of United States in support of neither party filed.|
|Feb 26 2019||Brief amici curiae of National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center and The National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys filed. (Corrected version submitted)|
|Feb 26 2019||Brief amici curiae of National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center and The National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys filed (3/11/2019).|
|Mar 20 2019||CIRCULATED|
|Mar 21 2019||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit.|
|Mar 21 2019||Brief of respondents Shelley Lorenzen, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 25 2019||Record received from the U.S.C.A. 9th Circuit and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court District of Oregon is electronic and located on Pacer, with the exception of some restricted district court documents that is electronic. The record is complete.|
|Mar 27 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Mar 28 2019||Brief amici curiae of State of California, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 28 2019||Brief amicus curiae of National Creditors Bar Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 12 2019||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Apr 17 2019||Reply of petitioner Bradley Weston Taggart filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 24 2019||Argued. For petitioner: Daniel L. Geyser, Dallas, Tex. For United States, as amicus curiae: Sopan Joshi, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Nicole A. Saharsky, Washington, D. C.|
|Jun 03 2019||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jul 05 2019||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
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.
Four Democrats unveiled legislation today to expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine justices to 13 -- but Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate quickly threw cold water on the proposal.
Here's our report from @jamesromoser:
Bill to enlarge the Supreme Court faces dim prospects in Congress - SCOTUSblog
Four congressional Democrats introduced legislation Thursday to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court from ...
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.