Petitions to Watch Tag

Three notable petitions were filed recently: one case arising from a police officer's use of deadly force, Sammis v. Nance; and two cases about standing, City of Los Angeles v. Kern County (standing to assert a Commerce Clause challenge) and Kentucky Baptist Homes for Children, Inc. v. Pedreira (standing to sue as a state taxpayer). The petitions, the opinions below, and the questions presented follow the jump.  Briefs in opposition have not yet been filed.

This edition of “Petitions to Watch” features cases up for consideration at the justices’ private conference today, Friday, April 2.  As always, it lists the petitions on the Court’s paid docket that Tom has deemed to have a reasonable chance of being granted.  Links to all previous editions are available in our SCOTUSwiki archive.

Two noteworthy petitions filed last month are Wong v. Smith, which challenges jury instructions as "coercive," and Novell v. SCO Group, which concerns the terms of transfer of copyright ownership. Briefs in opposition have not yet been filed in either case, but their petitions and questions...

This edition of “Petitions to Watch” features cases up for consideration at the Justices’ next private conference on this Friday, March 26. As always, it lists the petitions on the Court’s paid docket that Tom has deemed to have a reasonable chance of being granted. Links to all previous editions are available in our SCOTUSwiki archive.

Three recently filed cert. petitions defend a tax credit for donations to school tuition programs, ruled unconstitutional by the Ninth Circuit, that has disparately benefited donors to religious programs.  One is Garriott v. Winn; the second and third are both captioned Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn. Another recently filed but unrelated petition, Moore v. Hosemann, arises out of the unsuccessful attempt by Brian Moore, the Socialist Party presidential candidate in 2008, to register his name for the Mississippi ballot that year. The petitions and questions presented in all four cases follow the jump.  The briefs in opposition have not yet been filed.

Two noteworthy petitions were recently filed: Microsoft v. Lucent Technologies, which challenges the evidentiary standards in patent infringement trials; and Stolaj v. Holder, which disputes removal proceedings initiated against two noncitizens. Briefs in opposition have not yet been filed, but the petitions and their questions presented follow the jump.

This edition of “Petitions to Watch” features cases up for consideration at the Justices’ private conference on Friday, March 19.  As always, it lists the petitions on the Court’s paid docket that Tom has deemed to have a reasonable chance of being granted.  Links to all previous editions are available in our SCOTUSwiki archive.

Seven different cert. petitions by or against tobacco companies, growing out of a single D.C. Circuit opinion last spring, were filed at the Court last month.  All concern penalties imposed on the companies under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).  Lyle posted earlier on these cases here. The briefs in all of the petitions follow the jump.

The following three noteworthy petitions were recently filed: Rodrequis Armani Council v. United States (09-936), Louisiana Safety Association of Timbermen - Self Insurers Fund v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London (09-945), and Jaskolski v. Daniels (09-946).  Briefs in opposition have not yet been filed, but the questions presented and links to the petitions follow the jump.

This edition of “Petitions to Watch” features cases up for consideration at the Justices’ private conference tomorrow on Friday, March 5.  As always, it lists the petitions on the Court’s paid docket that Tom has deemed to have a reasonable chance of being granted.  Links to all previous editions are available in our SCOTUSwiki archive.