|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-1450||W.D. Ark.||Jan 7, 2013||Mar 19, 2013||9-0||Breyer||OT 2012|
Holding: The stipulation in this case that the class would seek less than five million dollars in damages, which was intended to establish the amount of damages in controversy, does not defeat federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on March 19, 2013.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|May 30 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 2, 2012)|
|Jun 29 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Center for Class Action Fairness filed.|
|Jul 2 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed.|
|Jul 2 2012||Brief of respondent Greg Knowles in opposition filed.|
|Jul 16 2012||Reply of petitioner The Standard Fire Insurance Company filed.|
|Jul 18 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 24, 2012.|
|Aug 31 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Sep 26 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 22, 2012.|
|Sep 26 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including November 28, 2012.|
|Oct 19 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent|
|Oct 22 2012||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs received)|
|Oct 22 2012||Brief of petitioner The Standard Fire Insurance Company filed.|
|Oct 23 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Oct 26 2012||Brief amici curiae of Professors E. Donald Elliott and John J. Watkins filed.|
|Oct 28 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Manufacturers filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amici curiae of Washington Legal Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amici curiae of 21st Century Casualty Company, et al. filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amici curiae of Alabama, et al. filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Defense Research Institute filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amici curiae of Manufactured Housing Institute, et al. filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Partnership for America filed.|
|Oct 29 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Center for Class Action Fairness filed.|
|Oct 31 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, January 7, 2013.|
|Nov 16 2012||CIRCULATED.|
|Nov 20 2012||Record received from U.S.C.A. for Eight Circuit. (1 envelope)|
|Nov 20 2012||Record from U.S.D.C. for Western District of Arkansas is electronic.|
|Nov 28 2012||Brief of respondent Greg Knowles filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 4 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Arkansas Trial Lawyers Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 5 2012||Brief amici curiae of Arkansas, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 5 2012||Brief amici curiae of Public Citizen, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 19 2012||Reply of petitioner The Standard Fire Insurance Company filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 7 2013||Argued. For petitioner: Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., Los Angeles, Cal. For respondent: David C. Frederick, Washington, D. C.|
|Mar 19 2013||Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Apr 22 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Jun 18 2013||Record returned to U.S.C.A. for 8th Circuit.|
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.