Kayla Warr

United States Supreme Court (8 summaries)

White v. Woodall

For a federal court to grant habeas corpus relief to a defendant, the previous state court's decision must involve an objectively unreasonable application of established federal law.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

United States v. Quality Stores, Inc., Et. al.

Severance payments are taxable wages under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law

Rosemond v. United States

A defendant is guilty of aiding and abetting under §924(c) when the defendant actively participates in the commission of a crime, and when the defendant has advance knowledge that a gun will be used in a crime.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice

The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 does not preclude the Respondents' state-law class actions alleging that the Petitioners assisted in carrying out a Ponzi scheme by alleging that the uncovered securities that plaintiffs purchased were protected by covered securities.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District

The Fifth Amendment requires that the government follow the Nollan/Dolan requirement when demanding property from a land-use permit applicant even when the permit is denied.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Property Law

United States v. Kebodeaux

The Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress the power to enact the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Agency for Int’l Development v. Alliance for Open Society Int’l, Inc.

The First Amendment does not allow for a policy that compels affirmation of a belief to be a condition for federal funding.

Area(s) of Law:
  • First Amendment

Metrish v. Lancaster

Federal habeas relief will only be granted if a state court, in rejecting a due process claim, unreasonably applied a clearly established Federal law.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

United States Supreme Court Certiorari Granted (9 summaries)

Kerry v. Din

Whether the spouse of a non-citizen has a protected liberty interest in the denial of a visa to the non-citizen and whether a person can challenge the denial or a visa and require the government to list specific reasons for denial.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Rodriguez v. United States

Whether conducting a canine sniff without reasonable suspicion at the conclusion of a lawful traffic stop is a "de minimis" intrusion on personal liberty and is thus lawful under the Fourth Amendment.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Carter

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 3287 applies to claims brought by private relators, and also leads to indefinite tolling; and whether the “first-to-file” bar in the False Claims Act is essentially a “one-case-at-a-time” rule.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif

Whether a bankruptcy court has constitutional authority to enter a final order in a federal 11 U.S.C. § 541 action when there is also a state property law issue present because the action does not “stem from the bankruptcy itself,” and whether conduct of a party is enough to satisfy implied consent for purposes of Article III judicial power.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

Comptroller v. Wynne

Whether the Constitution of the United States requires states to provide an income tax credit for income tax paid to other states

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law

Johnson v. United States

Whether possession of a shotgun is a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Lane v. Franks

(1) Whether the government, under the First Amendment, may retaliate against a public employee for giving testimony which was not a part of the employee’s ordinary job responsibilities; and (2) whether damages are precluded in a qualified immunity claim.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Ray Haluch Gravel Co., Et al. V. Central Pension Fund, Et al.

Whether a district court’s decision that does not resolve a request for contractual attorney’s fees is a final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which provides that courts of appeals have jurisdiction of appeals from final decisions of the district courts.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Appellate Procedure

United States v. Apel

Whether 18 U.S.C. §1382, which prohibits a person from reentering property owned by the military after an officer has ordered him not to reenter, applies to property where there is a public easement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Property Law