Federal Judiciary

Today’s orders

By Akin Gump Supreme Court Practice Group

The Court has granted four petitions for certiorari:

• Costco v. Omega (08-1423)
• Staub v. Proctor Hospital (09-400)
• United States v. Tohono O’odham Nation (09-846)
• Ransom v. MBNA, America Bank (09-907)

The Court has also asked for the views of the Solicitor General in one case, Placer Dome v. Provincial Government of Marinduque (09-944).

There is a notable order in Holster v. Gatco (08-1307): the decision below is vacated and remanded to the Second Circuit in light of Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance Co. Justice Scalia concurs and Justice Ginsburg dissents, joined by Justice Breyer.

The full order list is here.  Briefs in the granted cases follow the jump.

Title: Costco v. Omega
Docket: 08-1423
Issue: Whether the first-sale doctrine applies to imported goods manufactured abroad.

• Opinion below (9th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Petitioner’s reply
• Supplemental brief for petitioner
• Amicus brief of Public Citizen
• Amicus brief of Public Knowledge Electronic Frontier Education
• Amicus brief of the Retail Industry Leaders Association, Amazon.com, et al.
• Amicus brief of eBay
• Amicus brief of the Entertainment Merchants Association et al.
• Amicus brief for the United States
• Reply brief for petitioner in response to United States amicus brief

Title: Staub v. Proctor Hospital
Docket: 09-400
Issue: In what circumstances may an employer be held liable based on the unlawful intent of officials who caused or influenced but did not make the ultimate employment decision?

• Opinion below (7th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Amicus brief for the United States

Title: United States v. Tohono O’odham Nation
Docket: 09-846
Issue: Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1500 — which precludes jurisdiction by the Court of Federal Claims (CFC) over ”any claim for or in respect to which the plaintiff has any suit or process against the United States” or its agents “pending in any other court” – deprives the CFC of jurisdiction over a claim seeking monetary relief for the government?s alleged violation of fiduciary obligations if the plaintiff has another suit pending in federal district court based on substantially the same operative facts, especially when the plaintiff seeks monetary relief or other overlapping relief in the two suits.

• Opinion below (Federal Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Petitioner’s reply

Title: Ransom v. MBNA, America Bank
Docket: 09-907
Issue: Whether, in calculating the debtor?s ?projected disposable income? during the plan period, the bankruptcy court may allow an ownership cost deduction for vehicles only if the debtor is actually making payments on the vehicles.

• Opinion below (9th Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition

Full post as published by SCOTUSBLOG on April 19, 2010 (boomark / email).