|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|12-562||5th Cir.||Oct 9, 2013||Dec 3, 2013||9-0||Scalia||OT 2013|
Holding: The district court had jurisdiction to determine whether the partnerships’ lack of economic substance could justify imposing a valuation-misstatement penalty on the partners.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on December 3, 2013.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Nov 6 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 6, 2012)|
|Dec 19 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 11, 2013.|
|Jan 4 2013||Response Requested . (Due February 4, 2013)|
|Feb 4 2013||Brief of respondents Gary Woods, as Tax Matters Partner of Tesoro Drive Partners, et al. in opposition filed.|
|Feb 20 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 15, 2013.|
|Feb 20 2013||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 18 2013||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 22, 2013.|
|Mar 25 2013||Petition GRANTED. In addition to the question presented by the petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether the district court had jurisdiction in this case under 26 U. S. C. §6226 to consider the substantial valuation misstatement penalty.|
|Apr 4 2013||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including May 30, 2013.|
|Apr 4 2013||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including July 22, 2013.|
|May 30 2013||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)|
|May 30 2013||Brief of petitioner United States filed.|
|Jun 5 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Professor Amandeep S. Grewal in support of neither party filed.|
|Jul 19 2013||Brief of respondents Gary Woods, as Tax Matters Partner of Tesoro Drive Partners, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 22 2013||CIRCULATED.|
|Jul 23 2013||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, October 9, 2013.|
|Jul 25 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Professor David J. Shakow filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 26 2013||Brief amici curiae of Gordon W. Bush, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 26 2013||Brief amici curiae of New Millennium Trading, LLC, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 26 2013||Brief amici curiae of Scott and Audrey Blum filed. (Distributed)|
|Jul 26 2013||Brief amicus curiae of Partners in Jade Trading, LLC, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)|
|Aug 2 2013||Record received from U.S.C.A. for 5th Circuit is electronic and located on PACER.|
|Aug 2 2013||Record received from U.S.D.C. for Western District of Texas is electronic.|
|Aug 19 2013||Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 8 2013||Letter and attachments dated October 7, 2013 received from counsel for respondents. (Distributed)|
|Oct 9 2013||Argued. For petitioner: Malcolm L. Stewart, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Gregory G. Garre, Washington, D. C.|
|Oct 28 2013||Exhibits received from the U.S.D.C. for the Western District of Texas San Antonio Division. (Three boxes)|
|Dec 3 2013||Judgment REVERSED Scalia, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.|
|Jan 6 2014||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Jan 15 2014||Record from U.S.D.C. Western District of Texas (San Antonio) has been returned.|
The Mar-a-Lago case arrives at the Supreme Court. Here's an explainer on today's filing from @katieleebarlow, who notes that this isn't the first time Trump has asked the justices to intervene in fights over sensitive documents. (Both other times, the court ruled against him.)
In today's Voting Rights Act case, the conservative majority seemed likely to side with Alabama, though perhaps on narrower grounds than the state asked for. Here's @AHoweBlogger's analysis, plus courtroom sketches from Bill Hennessy (AKA @Artisbest).
Conservative justices seem poised to uphold Alabama’s redistricting plan in Voting Rights Act challenge - SCOTUSblog
In February, a divided Supreme Court temporarily blocked a ruling by a three-judge district court in Alabama, which ...
BREAKING: Donald Trump's lawyers have filed an emergency request asking the Supreme Court to intervene in the case over classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Trump wants SCOTUS to vacate a Sept. 21 ruling by the 11th Circuit. Here is the filing: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/22A283.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: voting rights and veterans' benefits.
First up is Merrill v. Milligan, a case about Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and how to decide if a state's redistricting plan dilutes Black voting power. @AHoweBlogger explains:
When are majority-Black voting districts required? In Alabama case, the justices will review that question. - SCOTUSblog
Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act bars election practices that result in a denial or abridgement of the right ...
Our first TikTok of the new term. @katieleebarlow breaks down opening day.