Author: Mary Pat Dwyer

The petition of the day is: Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi v. IndyMac MBS, Inc. 13-640 Issue: Whether the filing of a putative class action serves, under American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, to satisfy the three year time limitation in § 13 of the...

The petition of the day is: Terry v. United States 13-392 Issue: (1) Whether, in the context of a First-Amendment-protected contribution to a judicial campaign, the McCormick v. United States holding that campaign contributions cannot constitute bribery unless “the payments are made in return for an explicit...

At its Conference on February 28, 2014, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as “trade or business” status under ERISA, the time limitation in Section 13 of the Securities Act, whether state wage rates supersede collectively-bargained wage rates, and whether campaign contributions are bribery absent an “explicit” quid pro quo. This edition of “Petitions to watch” features petitions raising issues that Tom has determined to have a reasonable chance of being granted, although we post them here without consideration of whether they present appropriate vehicles in which to decide those issues.  Our policy is to include and disclose all cases in which Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, represents either a party or an amicus in the case, with the exception of the rare cases in which Goldstein & Russell represents the respondent(s) but does not appear on the briefs in the case.

The petition of the day is: Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Quebecor World (USA) Inc. v. American United Life Insurance Company 13-455 Issue: Whether Section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code eliminates the statutory power to avoid payments related to a securities transaction when a financial institution...

The petition of the day is: National Rifle Association v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives 13-137 Issue: Whether a nationwide, class-based, categorical ban on meaningful access to the quintessential means to exercise the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense can be reconciled with...

The petition of the day is: Warger v. Shauers 13-517 Issue: Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) permits a party moving for a new trial based on juror dishonest during voir dire to introduce juror testimony about statements made during deliberations that tend to show the alleged...

The petition of the day is: Trammell v. Williams 13-587 Issue: Whether the court of appeals exceeded its authority to grant a writ of habeas corpus when it completely disregarded and ignored this Court’s well-established precedent of Woodford v. Visciotti and its progeny, by finding a state...

The petition of the day is: Medina v. Arizona 13-735 Issue: Whether an autopsy report created as part of a homicide investigation, and asserting that the death was indeed caused by homicide, is “testimonial” under the Confrontation Clause framework established in Crawford v. Washington. ...

At its Conference on February 21, 2014, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as rights of eighteen- to twenty-year-olds under the Second Amendment, police use of nontrivial force against a passively resisting arrestee, Federal Power Act requirements for interstate electric rates, preemption of local ordinances banning renting housing to illegal aliens, and whether hosting poker games is a federal felony. This edition of “Petitions to watch” features petitions raising issues that Tom has determined to have a reasonable chance of being granted, although we post them here without consideration of whether they present appropriate vehicles in which to decide those issues.  Our policy is to include and disclose all cases in which Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, represents either a party or an amicus in the case, with the exception of the rare cases in which Goldstein & Russell represents the respondent(s) but does not appear on the briefs in the case.

The petition of the day is: Minnesota v. Sago 13-593 Issue: Whether Evans v. Michigan – which held that a finding of insufficient evidence precludes retrial under the Double Jeopardy Clause even if the finding is based on a legally erroneous analysis – or the cases cited...