OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Close This Box!

This edition of ?Petitions to watch? features cases up for consideration at the Justices? March 25 conference.  These are 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.

Note: Goldstein, Howe & Russell, P.C. serves as counsel to the petitioners in the following case, which is listed without regard to its likelihood of being granted.

Title: Kaiser Eagle Mountain, Inc. v. National Parks & Conservation Ass’n
Docket: 10-548
Issue(s): Does a court err by vacating an agency?s action and remanding for further administrative proceedings that will have no effect on the agency?s decision or serve any other substantive purpose?

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (9th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief for the United States in opposition
• Brief of National Parks Conservation Association in opposition
• Brief for respondents Donna Charpied et al. in opposition
• Petitioners' reply
• Amicus brief of Judge Craig Manson et al.
• Amicus brief of the Pacific Legal Foundation
• Amicus brief of New Kaiser Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Association
• Amicus brief of the Coachella Valley Economic Partnership

---

Title: Green Party of Connecticut v. Lenge
Docket: 10-795
Issue(s): Whether Connecticut's campaign finance law discriminates against minor-party candidates by imposing onerous qualifying requirements and including a trigger provision that provides a major-party opponent with an offsetting grant when a minor party opponent reaches a threshold level of contributions.

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (2d Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief of respondents Albert P. Lenge et al. in opposition
• Brief of respondents Audrey Blondin et al. in opposition
• Petitioners' reply

---

Note: Goldstein, Howe & Russell, P.C. serves as counsel to the petitioners in the following case, which is listed without regard to its likelihood of being granted.

Title: Council Tree Investors, Inc. v. Federal Communications Comm’n
Docket: 10-834
Issue(s): Whether a reviewing court has the discretion under Section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act to decline to set aside, or provide any remedy for, unlawful agency action?

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (3d Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition of the federal respondents
• Petitioners' reply
• Amicus brief of Antares Holding, LLC, et al.
• Amicus brief of John B. Muleta
• Amicus brief of Professor Daniel B. Rodriguez

---

Title: Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd. v. Novo Nordisk A/S
Docket: 10-844
Issue(s): Whether the counterclaim provision of the Hatch-Waxman Act applies when (1) there is ?an approved method of using the drug? that ?the patent does not claim,? and (2) the brand submits ?patent information? to the FDA that misstates the patent's scope, requiring ?correct[ion].?

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (3d Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Petitioners' reply
• Amicus brief of TEVA Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
• Amicus brief of Consumer Federation of America et al.
• Amicus brief of Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
• Amicus brief of Apotex, Inc.
• Amicus Generic Pharmaceutical Association

---

Title: Stovall v. Miller
Docket: 10-851
Issue(s): (1) Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in concluding that "established law" for purposes of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) is based on the law in effect when the state conviction becomes final; and (2) even if reviewed de novo, did the Sixth Circuit err in concluding that the suicide note here was "testimonial" under principles explained in Crawford v. Washington, such that Miller was entitled to relief.

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (6th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Petitioner's reply

---

Note: Goldstein, Howe & Russell, P.C. serves as counsel to the petitioners in the following case, which is listed without regard to its likelihood of being granted.

Title: Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington
Docket: 10-945
Issue(s): Whether the Fourth Amendment permits a jail to conduct a suspicionless strip search whenever an individual is arrested, including for minor offenses.

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (3d Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition for Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington et al.
• Brief in opposition for Essex County Correctional Facility et al.
• Petitioner's reply

---

Title: Davis v. Humphrey
Docket: 10-949
Issue(s): Whether the court of appeals has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253 to review a district court's final order on a habeas petition that was transferred to the district court from the Supreme Court.

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (11th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Amicus brief of the Innocence Project
• Petitioner's reply

---

Title: Davis v. Humphrey
Docket: 10-950
Issue(s): 1) Whether Sawyer v. Whitley (1992), supplies the appropriate burden of proof for a claim that the execution of an innocent person violates the Eighth Amendment; 2) whether, in the context of an actual innocence proceeding, the district court gave proper consideration to evidence that the alternative suspect confessed in accordance with House v. Bell (2006), and Schlup v. Delo (1995); 3) whether, through witness testimony, the petitioner established his innocence to the requisite degree to render his execution unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment; and 4) whether the court of appeals has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253 to review the district court's final order in the first instance?

Certiorari stage documents:

• Jurisdictional statement and petition for writ of habeas corpus
• Opinion below (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia)
• Brief in opposition
• Amicus brief of the Innocence Project
• Reply brief

---

The following petitions have been re-listed for the conference of March 25.  If any other paid petitions are re-distributed for this conference, we will add them below as soon as their re-distribution is noted on the docket.

Title: Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC
Docket: 10-553
Issue(s): Whether the ministerial exception, which prohibits most employment-related lawsuits against religious organizations by employees performing religious functions, applies to a teacher at a religious elementary school who teaches the full secular curriculum, but also teaches daily religion classes, is a commissioned minister, and regularly leads students in prayer and worship.

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (6th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition of the EEOC
• Brief in opposition of respondent Cheryl Perich
• Amicus brief of religious organizations
• Amicus brief of Christian Reformed Church in North America et al.
• Amicus brief of International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention et al.
• Petitioner's reply brief

---

Title: Weishuhn v. Catholic Diocese of Lansing
Docket: 10-760
Issue(s): (1) Whether the ministerial exception grounded in the First Amendment bars employees of religious institutions, from asserting a state civil rights claim where the employment action does not involve selection of employees or an examination of church doctrine; (2) whether an employee of a religious institution who is found to be a ministerial employee should be barred from bringing a state whistleblowers' action.

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (Court of Appeals of Michigan)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition

---

Title: Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Jackson
Docket: 10-735
Issue(s): Whether the Due Process Clause prevents state courts from employing the class-action device to eliminate fundamental substantive and procedural protections that would otherwise apply to adjudications of class members' individual claims.

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (Court of Appeal of Louisiana, 4th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Petitioners' reply
• Amicus brief of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States
• Amicus brief of the Pacific Legal Foundation
• Amicus brief of DRI - The Voice of the Defense Bar
• Amicus brief of the Washington Legal Foundation

---

Title: Kiyemba v. Obama
Docket: 10-775
Issue(s): Whether a judicial officer of the United States, having jurisdiction of the habeas corpus petition of an alien transported by the executive to, and held at, an offshore prison, has any judicial power to direct the prisoner's release.

Certiorari stage documents:

• Opinion below (D.C. Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Petitioners' reply

---