Willamette Law Online

United States Supreme Court

( 21 summaries )

Opinions Filed in November 2011

Credit Suisse Securities v. Simmonds

Civil Procedure: Whether the two year statute of limitations in section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is subject to tolling, and if so, when does tolling begin.

(Filing Date: 11-29-2011)

Hall v. United States

Bankruptcy Law: Whether a debtor must pay federal income tax on capital gains from the sale of their farm during bankruptcy proceedings.

(Filing Date: 11-29-2011)

First American Financial Corp. v. Edwards

Standing: Whether a private purchaser of real estate settlement services has Article III standing to sue for a RESPA violation when that violation does not affect the price or the quality of the services provided.

(Filing Date: 11-28-2011)

Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC

Civil Procedure: Whether Congress divested federal district courts of federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 with respect to private actions brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227.

(Filing Date: 11-28-2011)

Vasquez v. United States

Evidence: Whether it is reversible error in a criminal case for a trial court to admit recordings of a conversation for the truth of the matter where the witness admits the point on which the government seeks to establish bias, where a logical inference is necessary to establish an inconsistent statement, and where the statements otherwise constitute inadmissible hearsay.

(Filing Date: 11-28-2011)

Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products Corp

Preemption: Whether the Locomotive Inspection Act (“LIA”), which regulates the “use” of a locomotive on a railroad line 49 U.S.C. § 20701, preempts the field of state common-law product liability claims by workers injured in railroad maintenance facilities.

(Filing Date: 11-09-2011)

Nat’l Meat Ass’n v. Harris

Preemption: PREEMPTION (Whether federal regulations authorized by the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. § 601, et seq.) that require slaughterhouses to hold nonambulatory animals for observation for evidence of disease preempts a state law that requires such animals be immediately killed.)

(Filing Date: 11-09-2011)

Greene v. Fisher

Habeas Corpus: (For the purpose of adjudicating a state prisoner’s petition for federal habeas relief, the temporal cutoff for whether a decision from the Supreme Court qualifies as “clearly established Federal law” is the time of the relevant state-court adjudication on the merits.)

(Filing Date: 11-08-2011)

Smith v. Cain

Criminal Procedure: Whether Louisiana state courts erred when they rejected petitioner's Brady v. Maryland claims that the district attorney failed to produce evidence favorable to the accused and thus violated his due process rights.

(Filing Date: 11-08-2011)

U.S. v. Jones

Criminal Procedure: Whether the government violated respondent’s Fourth Amendment rights by attaching a GPS tracking device to his vehicle and monitoring his movements on public streets without a valid warrant and without his consent.

(Filing Date: 11-08-2011)

Bobby v. Dixon

Criminal Procedure: Antiterrrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) provides that a state prisoner seeking a writ of habeas corpus from a federal court “must show that the state court’s ruling on the claim being presented in federal court was so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement.”

(Filing Date: 11-07-2011)

Jackson v. Hobbs

Criminal Law: Whether sentencing a fourteen year old to life imprisonment without possibility of parole after being convicted of aggravated murder constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

(Filing Date: 11-07-2011)

Kawashima v. Holder

Immigration: Whether petitioners' convictions for tax crimes constituted aggravated felonies under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), and thus subjected them to deportation under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).

(Filing Date: 11-07-2011)

KPMG LLP v. Robert Cocchi et al.

Alternative Dispute Resolution: When a complaint contains both arbitrable and nonarbitrable claims, the Federal Arbitration Act requires courts to compel arbitration of the arbitrable claims.

(Filing Date: 11-07-2011)

Magner v. Gallagher

Criminal Law: Discrimination: (Whether a disparate impact claim may be brought under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and, if so, what approach should the Court use to analyze such a claim.)

(Filing Date: 11-07-2011)

Miller v. Alabama

Criminal Law: Whether a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is cruel and usual punishment under the Eighth Amendment when the offender was fourteen years old at the time of the criminal action.

(Filing Date: 11-07-2011)

Zivotofsky v. Clinton

Constitutional Law: (1) Whether a suit requiring a federal court to order the State Department to adhere to a Congressional statute requiring official government documents identify Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is a justiciable issue, (2) Whether Section 214 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003, impermissibly infringes the President's power to recognize foreign sovereigns.

(Filing Date: 11-07-2011)

Gonzalez v. Thaler

Habeas Corpus: Whether the AEDPA’s one-year statute of limitations for an application for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 should be calculated based on “the date on which the judgment became final” as held by the 8th Circuit or “the expiration of the time for seeking such review” as held by the 5th Circuit.

(Filing Date: 11-02-2011)

Perry v. New Hampshire

Evidence: Whether a defendant may exclude eyewitness identification stemming from impermissibly suggestive circumstances, regardless of improper state conduct related to that identification, based on the protections of due process.

(Filing Date: 11-02-2011)

Minneci v. Pollard

Constitutional Law: Bivens Actions: Whether a federal inmate who has adequate remedies under state law may bring a Bivens action against employees of a private corrections company that contracts with the federal government for prison services.

(Filing Date: 11-01-2011)

Rehberg v. Paulk

Civil Procedure: Whether a government official is entitled to absolutely immunity from a section 1983 claim for damages when their false testimony to a grand jury caused the prosecution of an innocent individual.

(Filing Date: 11-01-2011)