|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|14-1123||Pa. Super. Ct.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2015|
Issue: Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a state court from certifying a class action, and entering a monetary judgment in favor of the class, where the court permits the use of extrapolation to relieve individual class members of their burden of proof and forecloses the defendants from presenting individualized defenses to class members’ claims.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 13 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 16, 2015)|
|Mar 25 2015||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|Apr 8 2015||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 27, 2015.|
|Apr 16 2015||Brief amicus curiae of The Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc. filed. VIDED.|
|Apr 16 2015||Brief amicus curiae of DRI - The Voice of the Defense Bar filed. VIDED.|
|Apr 16 2015||Brief amicus curiae of Retail Litigation Center, Inc. filed. VIDED.|
|Apr 16 2015||Brief amici curiae of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed. VIDED.|
|Apr 20 2015||Brief of respondents Michelle Braun, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, et al. in opposition filed.|
|May 4 2015||Reply of petitioners Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., et al. filed.|
|May 5 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 21, 2015.|
|May 19 2015||Rescheduled.|
|May 26 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 28, 2015.|
|Jun 1 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 4, 2015.|
|Mar 22 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 25, 2016.|
|Mar 23 2016||Supplemental brief of petitioners Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Mar 28 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 1, 2016.|
|Apr 4 2016||Petition DENIED.|
The next #SCOTUS grants? Kevin McCarthy v. Nancy Pelosi in a fight over congressional proxy voting; the First Amendment-based ministerial exception to employment law returns; nondelegation doctrine (!); and the constitutionality of the FTC's structure.
Revenge of the rescheduled cases: Congressional proxy voting, the ministerial exception, and more - SCOTUSblog
The Relist Watch column examines cert petitions that the Supreme Court has “relisted” for its upcoming con...
JUST IN: The Supreme Court, over dissents from the three liberal justices, rejects a request from Texas abortion clinics to immediately return the litigation over Texas' six-week abortion law to a federal district court.
The Supreme Court issues a single opinion today, ruling in an 8-1 vote that a criminal defendant's rights were violated under the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause when the government introduced a plea allocution from another proceeding. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-637_10n2.pdf
Today at SCOTUS: We expect one or more opinions in argued cases to be issued starting at 10 a.m. EST. At 9:45, we'll fire up our live blog, where we'll also chat about this week's arguments and last night's ruling on Trump records. Grab your ☕️ & join us!
Announcement of opinions for Thursday, Jan. 20 - SCOTUSblog
On Thursday, January 20, we will be live blogging as the court releases opinions in one or more argued cases f...
Tonight's ruling on the Trump Jan. 6 documents, explained.
BREAKING: Trump loses his bid at SCOTUS to block Congress from obtaining his White House records related to 1/6/21. Clarence Thomas is the lone public dissenter in the apparent 8-1 ruling.
#SCOTUS rejects request from former President Donald Trump to block the release of documents to committee investigating Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Here's the link: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a272_9p6b.pdf