Supreme Court Docket
Unscheduled
October 2003 Term
No. 02-6683
Subject:
-
Habeas Corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Successive Petitions, Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA)
- When a U.S. District Court re-characterizes a pro-se federal prisoner's first post conviction motion as a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, does such re-characterization make the prisoner's subsequent attempt to file a § 2255 petition a "second or successive petition" within the purview of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA)?
- Does this Court have jurisdiction to review the Eleventh Circuit's decision affirming the dismissal of a § 2255 petition for writ of habeas corpus as second or successive?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 11th Circuit, Filed: May 7, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: January 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
John M. Lamie v. United States Trustee
No. 02-693
Subject:
-
Bankruptcy, Attorney's Fees, 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(1)
-
Does 11 U.S.C. § 330(a)(1) authorize a court to award fees to a debtor's attorney?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 4th Circuit, Filed: May 31, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: March 10, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
Linda Frew, et al. v. Albert Hawkins, Commissioner, Texas Health and Human Servs. Commission, et al.
No. 02-628
Subject:
-
Eleventh Amendment, Immunity, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Civil Rights
- Do State officials waive Eleventh Amendment immunity
by urging the district court to adopt a consent decree when
the decree is based on federal law and specifically provides
for the district court's ongoing supervision of the officials'
decree compliance?
- Does the Eleventh Amendment bar a district court from enforcing a consent decree entered into by State officials unless the plaintiffs show that the "decree violation is also a violation of a federal right" remediable under [42 U.S.C.] § 1983?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 5th Circuit, Filed: July 24, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: March 10, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties
- Petitioner (Petition) [PDF]
Verizon Communications Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP
No. 02-682
Subject:
-
Antitrust, Standing, Civil Procedure
-
Did the Court of Appeals err in reversing the District Court's dismissal of respondent's antitrust claims?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 2nd Circuit, Amended Opinion Filed: August 14, 2002, Errata Filed: August 30, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: March 10, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
John J. Fellers v. United States
No. 02-6320
Subject:
-
Right to Counsel, Miranda Warnings, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Criminal Law
- Did the 8th Circuit err when it concluded that Feller's Sixth Amendment right to counsel under Massiah v. United States, 377 U.S. 201 (1964), was not violated because he was not interrogated by government agents when the proper standard under Supreme Court precedent is whether the the government agents deliberately elicited information from him?
- Should second statements, preceded by Miranda warnings, have been suppressed as fruits of an illegal post-indictment interview without the presence of counsel, under this Court's decisions in Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (1984), and Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 (1975)?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 8th Circuit [PDF], Filed: April 8, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: March 10, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Jeff Groh v. Joseph R. Ramirez, et al.
No. 02-811
Subject:
-
Search Warrants, Fourth Amendment, Qualified Immunity, Criminal Law, Civil Rights
- Whether the Ninth Circuit properly ruled that a law enforcement officer violated clearly established law, and thus was personally liable in damages and not entitled to qualified immunity, when at the time he acted there was no decision by the Supreme Court or any other court so holding, and the only lower court decisions addressing the issue had found the same conduct did not violate the law.
- Whether law enforcement officers violate the particularity requirement of the 4th Amendment when they execute a search warrant already approved by a magistrate judge, based on an attached application and affidavit properly describing with particularity the items to be searched and seized, but the warrant itself does not include the same level of detail.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit [PDF], Amended Opinion Filed: July 25, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: March 3, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.
No. 02-658
Subject:
-
Clean Air Act, Administrative Orders
-
Whether Sections 113(a)(5) and 167 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7413(a)(5)
and 7477, authorize the Environmental Protection Agency to issue administrative
orders to prevent construction of a major emitting facility where a state
permitting authority is prepared to grant the facility operator a "prevention-of-significant-deterioration"
air quality permit based on an arbitrary and capricious application of the
statutory requirement that such sources of air pollution be subject to the
best available control technology.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit [PDF], Filed: July 30, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: February 24, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Sec. Admin. v. Pauline Thomas
No. 02-763
Subject:
-
Social Security Act, Disability
-
Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act define disability as the
"inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason
of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be
expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last
for a continuous period of not less than 12 months." 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A);
42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(A). The Act further provides that a claimant "shall
be determined to be under a disability only if his physical or mental impairment
or impairments are of such severity that he is not only unable to do his
previous work but cannot, considering his age, education, and work experience,
engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the
national economy." 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A);
42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(A).
Under the Act, "work which exists in the national economy" means
"work which exists in significant numbers either in the region where
such individual lives or in several regions in the country." 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A);
42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(A). The question presented is:
Whether the Commissioner of Social Security may determine that a claimant is not "disabled" within the meaning of the Act because the claimant remains physically and mentally able to do her previous work, without considering whether that particular job exists in significant numbers in the national economy.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 3rd Circuit, Filed: June 21, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: February 24, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties
- Petitioner (Petition) [PDF] [RTF] [TEXT]
- Petitioner - Appendix (Petition) [PDF] [RTF] [TEXT]
- Petitioner - Reply (Petition) [PDF] [RTF] [TEXT]
United States v. Lashawn Lowell Banks
No. 02-473
Subject:
-
Fourth Amendment, "Knock-and-Announce" Law, 18 U.S.C. § 3109
-
Whether law enforcement officers executing a warrant to search for illegal
drugs violated the Fourth Amendment and 18 U.S.C. § 3109, thereby requiring
suppression of evidence, when they forcibly entered a small apartment in
the middle of the afternoon 15-20 seconds after knocking and announcing
their presence.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit [PDF], Filed: March 5, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: February 24, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
Raytheon Company, et al. v. Joel Hernandez
No. 02-749
Subject:
-
Americans with Disabilties Act ("ADA"), Preferential Rehire Rights
-
Whether the Americans with Disabilities Act confers preferential rehire rights on employees lawfully terminated for misconduct, such as illegal drug use.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Filed: June 11, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: February 24, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Amicus - Petitioners
- Equal Employment Advisory Council (Petition) [PDF]
Maryland v. Joseph Jermaine Pringle
No. 02-809
Subject:
-
Fourth Amendment, Search and Seizure, Criminal Law
-
Where drugs and a roll of cash are found in the passenger compartment of a car with multiple occupants, and all deny ownership, does the Fourth Amendment prohibit a police officer form arresting the occupants of the car?
- Maryland Court of Appeals, Filed: August 27, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: March 24, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
State of Arizona v. Rodney J. Gant
No. 02-1019
Subject:
-
Search and Seizure, Fourth Amendment, Criminal Law
-
When police arrest the recent occupant of a vehicle outside the vehicle, are they precluded from searching the vehicle pursuant to New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981), unless the arrestee was actually or constructively aware of the police before getting out of the vehicle?
- Arizona Court of Appeals, Division Two, Filed: March 29, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: April 21, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
United States v. Samuel F. Patane
No. 02-1183
Subject:
-
Arrest, Miranda Warnings, Fifth Amendment, Criminal Law
-
Whether a failure to give a suspect the warnings prescribed by Miranda
v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), requires the suppression of physical evidence
derived from the suspect's unwarned but voluntary statement.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 10th Circuit, Filed: September 17, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: April 21, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. v. Dennis Cline, et al.
No. 02-1080
Subject:
-
Age
Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, Reverse Discrimination, Equal Protection
-
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding, contrary
to decisions of the First and Seventh Circuits, that the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C.
§§ 621-634, prohibits "reverse discrimination," i.e., employer
actions, practices, or policies that treat older workers more
favorably than younger workers who are at least 40 years old.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 6th Circuit, Filed: July 22, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: April 21, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Charles E. Edwards
No. 02-1196
Subject:
-
Investment Contracts, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Securities Law
-
Whether the Eleventh Circuit erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that an investment scheme is excluded from the term "investment contract" in the definitions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(10), if the promoter promises a fixed rather than variable return or if the investor is contractually entitled to a particular amount or rate of return?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 11th Circuit, Filed: August 6, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: April 21, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
Delma Banks, Jr. v.Janie Cockrell, Director, Texas Dept. Criminal Justice
No. 02-8286
Subject:
-
Death Penalty, Habeas Corpus, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Sixth Amendment
- Did the 5th Circuit err in rejecting Banks' claim under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), that the prosecution suppressed material witness impeachment evidence that prejudiced him in the penalty phase of his trial, on the grounds that: (a) the evidence supporting the claim was procedurally defaulted, notwithstanding the fact that there was no reasonable basis for concluding that counsel for Banks could have discovered the suppressed evidence prior to or during that trial or state post-conviction proceedings; and (b) the suppressed evidence was immaterial to Banks' death sentence, where the panel neglected to consider that the trial prosecutors viewed the evidence to be of "utmost importance" to showing a capital sentence was appropriate?
- Did the 5th Circuit act contrary to Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) and Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000), when it weighed each item of mitigating evidence separately and concluded that no single category would have brought a different result at sentencing without weighing the impact of the evidence collectively?
- Did the 5th Circuit act contrary to Harris v. Nelsen, 394 U.S. 286 (1969) and Withrow v. Williams, 507 U.S. 680 (1993) in holding that Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b) does not apply to habeas proceedings because "evidentiary hearings" in those proceedings are not similar to civil trials?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 5th Circuit, Filed: August 20, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: April 21, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
Andrew J. Kontrick v. Robert A. Ryan
No. 02-819
Subject:
-
Bankruptcy Law
-
[Coming Soon]
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 7th Circuit [PDF], Filed: July 8, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: April 28, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Office of Independent Counsel v. Allan J. Favish
No. 02-954
Subject:
-
Freedom of Information Act, Privacy
-
The Freedom of Information Act's Exemption 7(C) protects from disclosure
"records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes"
if their production "could reasonably be expected to constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(7)(C). The
question presented is:
Whether the Office of Independent Counsel properly withheld, under Exemption 7(C), photographs relating to the death of former Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Underlying Decision, Filed: July 12, 2000
- U.S. District Court - Central Dist. of Cal. [PDF], Order and Civil Minutes, Filed: January 11, 2001
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit [PDF], Filed: June 6, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: May 5, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
- Petitioner Allan Favish's Web Page on Vincent Foster's Death
Briefs:
-
Parties
- Petitioner (Petition) [PDF] [RTF] [TEXT]
- Respondent Allan J. Favish - Opposition (Petition) [PDF]
- Respondents Sheila Foster Anthony and Lisa Foster Moody (Petition) [PDF]
- Petitioner - Reply (Petition) [PDF] [RTF] [TEXT]
State of Illinois v. Robert S. Lidster
No. 02-1060
Subject:
-
Vehicle Checkpoints, Fourth Amendment, Criminal Law
-
Whether Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32 (2000), prohibits police officers from conducting a checkpoint organized to investigate a prior offense, stopping all oncoming motorists to hand out flyers about the offense and arresting motorists for drunk driving.
- Illinois Supreme Court, Filed: October 18, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: May 5, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Edith Jones, et al., etc. v. R. R. Donnelley & Sons Co.
No. 02-1205
Subject:
-
[Coming Soon]
-
[Coming Soon]
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 7th Circuit [PDF], Filed: September 16, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: May 19, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Gary Locke, Governor of Washington, et al. v. Joshua Davey
No. 02-1315
Subject:
-
[Coming Soon]
-
[Coming Soon]
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit [PDF], Filed: July 18, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: May 19, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
-
Parties
- Respondent - Opposition (Petition) [PDF
State of Missouri v. Patrice Seibert
No. 02-1371
Subject:
-
Fifth Amendment, Miranda, Custodial Interrogation, Criminal Law
-
Is the rule from Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U.S. 298 (1985), that a suspect who has once responded to unwarned yet uncoercive questioning is not thereby disabled form waiving his rights and confessing after he has been given the requisite Miranda warnings, abrogated when the initial failure to give the Miranda warnings was intentional?
- Supreme Court of Missouri, Filed: December 10, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: May 19, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
United States Postal Service v. Flamingo Industries (USA) Ltd., et al.
No. 02-1290
Subject:
-
Antitrust, Sherman Act, Clayton Act, Definition of "Person"
-
The federal antitrust laws apply to a "person," which
is defined to include "corporations and associations
existing under or authorized by the laws of * * * the
United States." 15 U.S.C. §§ 7 (Sherman Act), 12(a)
(Clayton Act). The question presented is whether the
United States Postal Service is a "person" amenable to
suit under the antitrust laws.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Filed: August 23, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: May 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
George H. Baldwin v. Michael Reese
No. 02-964
Subject:
-
Habeas Corpus, Exhaustion of Remedies Doctrine, Criminal Law
-
For the purposes of exhausting all available state court remedies to seek federal habeas corpus relief, does a state prisoner "alert" the State's highest court that he is raising a federal claim when, in that court, he neither cites a specific provision of the federal constitution nor cites at least one authority that has decided the claim on a federal basis?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Filed: March 12, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: May 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Olympic Airways v. Rubina Husain, etc., et al.
No. 02-1348
Subject:
-
Warsaw Convention, Transportation Law, Wrongful Death
-
Whether the "accident" condition precedent to air carrier liability for a passenger's death under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention is satisfied when a passenger's pre-existing medical condition is aggravated by exposure to a normal condition in the aircraft cabin, even if the carrier's negligence was a link in the chain of causation.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Filed: December 12, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: May 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Engine Manufacturers Association, et al. v. South Coast Air Quality Management District, et al.
No. 02-1343
Subject:
-
Clean Air Act, Federalism, Preemption
-
Whether local government regulations prohibiting the purchase of new motor vehicles with specified emission characteristics--which are otherwise approved for sale by state and federal regulators--are preempted by the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq.
- U.S. District Court - Central Dist. of Cal. [PDF] Filed: August 21, 2001
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit [PDF], Filed: October 24, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 9, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Michael D. Crawford v. State of Washington
No. 02-9410
Subject:
-
Sixth Amendment, Confrontation Clause, Criminal Law
- Whether the Confrontation Clause of the 6th Amendment permits the admission against a criminal defendant of a custodial statement by a potential accomplice on the ground that parts of the statement "interlock" with the defendant's custodial statement.
- Whether the Confrontation Clause framework established in Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (1980) should be reevaluated and read to unequivocally prohibit the admission of out-of-court statements insofar as they are contained in "testimonial" materials, such as tape-recorded custodial statements.
- Supreme Court of Washington, Filed: September 26 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 9, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Lee M. Till, et ux. v. SCS Credit Corporation
No. 02-1016
Subject:
-
Bankruptcy, Chapter 13 "Cramdown" Provision
- Is an undersecured creditor entitled to the "indubitable equivalent" of its nonbankruptcy entitlement for purposes of discounting deferred payments to present value under the Chapter 13 cramdown provision at 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(5)(B)(ii), resulting in fixing of a subprime lender's 21% contract rate as the presumptive discount rate?
- What is the proper method for discounting of deferred payments to present value on property retained by the debtor under the Chapter 13 cramdown provision, and what is the creditor entitled to be compensated for in calculating the appropriate discount rate of interest?
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 7th Circuit, Filed: August 21, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 16, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Shakur Muhammad v. Mark Close
No. 02-9065
Subject:
-
Prisoner Civil Rights Actions, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Conditions of Confinement, Eighth Amendment
- Whether a plaintiff who wishes to bring a [42 U.S.C.] Section 1983 suit challenging only the conditions, rather than the fact or duration, of his confinement, must satisfy the favorable termination requirement of Heck v. Humphrey.
- Whether a prison inmate who has been, but is no longer, in administrative segregation may bring a Section 1983 suit challenging the conditions of his confinement (i.e. his prior placement in administrative segregation) without first satisfying the favorable termination requirement of Heck v. Humphrey.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 6th Circuit, Filed: September 23, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 16, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
United States v. Abel C. Galletti, et al.
No. 02-1389
Subject:
-
Taxation, Business Partnerships
-
Whether, in order to enforce the derivative liability of partners for the tax debts of their partnership, the United States must make a separate assessment of the taxes owed by the partnership against each of the partners directly.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 9th Circuit, Amended Opinion Filed: November 20, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 23, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General of Missouri v. Missouri Municipal League, et al.
02-1238
Federal Communications Commission and United States v. Missouri Municipal League, et al.
02-1386
Southwestern Bell Telephone, L.P., fka Southwestern Bell Telephone Company v. Missouri Municipal League, et al.
02-1405
Subject:
-
Telecommunications, Federalism, Preemption
-
Whether 47 U.S.C. § 253(a), which provides that "[n]o
State * * * regulation * * * may prohibit * * * the
ability of any entity to provide any interstate or intrastate
telecommunications service," preempts a state
law prohibiting political subdivisions of the State from
offering telecommunications service to the public.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 8th Circuit, Filed: August 14, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 23, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet (No. 02-1238) From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Docket Sheet (No. 02-1386) From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Docket Sheet (No. 02-1405) From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
State of Tennessee v. George Lane, et al.
No. 02-1667
Subject:
-
[Coming Soon]
-
[Coming Soon]
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 6th Circuit, Filed: January 10, 2003
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 23, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Northwestern University - Medill School of Journalism: On the Docket
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Richard Vieth, et al. v. Robert C. Jubelirer, President of the Pennsylvania Senate, et al.
No. 02-1580
Subject:
-
Redistricting, Apportionment, Elections
-
[Coming Soon]
- U.S. District Court - Middle District of Pennsylvania [PDF], Opinion and Order Granting Motions to Dismiss in Part, Filed: April 8, 2002
- U.S. District Court - Middle District of Pennsylvania [PDF], Opinion and Order Granting Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Filed: April 8, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Probable Jurisdiction Noted: June 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
Briefs:
- [Coming Soon]
Raymond B. Yates, M.D., etc. v. William T. Henton, Trustee
No. 02-458
Subject:
-
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA), Working Owner's Participation
-
Whether the working owner of a business (here, the sole shareholder of
a corporate employer) is precluded from being a "participant"
under Section 3(7) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(7), in an ERISA plan.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 6th Circuit, Filed: April 19, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
Briefs:
Household Credit Services v. Sharon R. Pfennig
No. 02-857
Subject:
-
Truth in Lending Act ("TILA"), Banking, Credit Card Fees
-
Whether the Federal Reserve Board reasonably classified a fee imposed
by a credit card lender because a consumer has exceeded the credit limit
as one of the "other charges which may be imposed" under the account
(15 U.S.C. § 1637(a)(5)) rather than as a "finance charge" (15 U.S.C.
§ 1605(a)), within the meaning of the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601
et seq.<
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 6th Circuit, Filed: April 11, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
Briefs:
Buck Doe, et al. v. Elaine L. Chao, U.S. Secretary of Labor
No. 02-1377
Subject:
Question:-
Whether, under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, an individual who has proven a violation of the Privacy Act, but cannot prove actual damages, is automatically entitled to $1000 in damages.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 4th Circuit [PDF] [TEXT], Amended Opinion Filed: October 7, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
Briefs:
South Florida Water Management District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians, et al.
No. 02-626
Subject:
-
Native Americans, Clean Water Act
-
Whether petitioner's longstanding practice of pumping accumulated water from a water collection canal to a water conservation area within the Florida Everglades constitutes an addition of a pollutant from a point source for purposes of Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1342, where the water contains a pollutant but the pumping station source itself adds no pollutants to the water being pumped.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 11th Circuit, Filed: February 1, 2002
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: June 27, 2003
Resources:
- Docket Sheet From the U.S. Supreme Court.
Briefs:
To view PDF files listed on this page you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader
