X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Below are cases coming before the U.S. Supreme Court in the coming weeks and the lawyers who will argue them. TODAY Edith Jones, et al. v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co. No. 02-1205 Certiorari to the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether a federal law providing a four-year “catch-all” statute of limitations on civil lawsuits applies to new causes of action under the 1991 Civil Rights Act. For petitioners: H. Candace Gorman, Chicago; and Gregory Garre, assistant to the solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for United States, as amicus curiae). For respondent: Carter Phillips, Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, Washington, D.C.; and Kevin Newsom, solicitor general, Office of the Alabama Attorney General, Montgomery, Ala. (for Alabama and other states, as amicus curiae). Jeffrey Beard, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, et al. v. George Banks No. 02-1603 Certiorari to the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether the 1988 ruling in Mills v. Maryland, which stated that jurors do not have to agree unanimously on mitigating circumstances when considering a death sentence, can be applied retroactively. For petitioners: Ronald Eisenberg, deputy district attorney, Office of Philadelphia District Attorney, Philadelphia. For respondent: Albert Flora Jr., Luzerne County public defender’s office, Wilkes-Barre, Pa. WEDNESDAY United States v. Manuel Flores-Montano No. 02-1794 Certiorari to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether, under the Fourth Amendment, customs officers must have reasonable suspicion to remove and search a vehicle’s gas tank at international borders. For petitioner: Lisa Blatt, assistant to the solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. For respondent: Steven Hubachek, Federal Defenders of San Diego, San Diego. Republic of Austria, et al. v. Maria Altmann No. 03-13 Certiorari to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act allows U.S. citizens to sue foreign states for actions that occurred prior to 1952, when the U.S. first allowed such suits in restricted circumstances. The case stems from a California woman’s suit against the Republic of Austria and the Austrian Gallery for six Gustav Klimt paintings in their possession that she inherited from an uncle in 1945. For petitioners: Scott Cooper, Proskauer Rose, Los Angeles; and Thomas Hungar, deputy solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for United States, as amicus curiae). For respondent: E. Randol Schoenberg, Burris & Schoenberg, Los Angeles. MONDAY Tennessee Student Assistance Corp. v. Pamela Hood No. 02-1606 Certiorari to the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether an individual may sue a state, otherwise immune to federal suits under the 11th Amendment, under federal bankruptcy laws. For petitioner: Daryl Brand, associate solicitor general, Office of the Tennessee Attorney General, Nashville. For respondent: Leonard Gerson, Angel & Frankel, New York. Michael Yarborough, Warden v. Michael Alvarado No. 02-1684 Certiorari to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether a court must consider a juvenile’s age when determining whether he or she is in “custody” for the purpose of triggering the required Miranda warning. For petitioner: Deborah Chuang, deputy attorney general, California attorney general’s office, Los Angeles; and John Elwood, assistant to the solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for United States, as amicus curiae). For respondent: Tara Allen, Malibu (appointed by court.) MARCH 2 Doug Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice v. Michael Wayne Haley No. 02-1824 Certiorari to the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether the rule that allows courts to accept claims of “actual innocence” in federal habeas claims despite “procedural default” can be applied to a sentencing error in a non-death-penalty case. For petitioner: R. Ted Cruz, solicitor general, Texas attorney general’s office; and Matthew Roberts, assistant to the solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for United States, as amicus curiae). For respondent: Eric Albritton, Longview, Texas. John Ashcroft, U.S. Attorney General v. American Civil Liberties Union, et al. No. 03-218 Certiorari to the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether the Child Online Protection Act, which aims to restrict children’s online access to material that is “harmful to minors,” violates the First Amendment. The court had remanded the case to the Third Circuit in 2002. For petitioner: Theodore Olson, solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. For respondents: Ann Beeson, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York. MARCH 3 Basim Omar Sabri v. United States No. 03-44 Certiorari to the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether a federal statute that makes it a crime to bribe agents of local government bodies that receive federal funds has enough nexus to a federal interest to be a constitutional exercise of congressional power. For petitioner: Andrew Birrell, Birrell & Newmark, Minneapolis. For respondent: Michael Dreeben, deputy solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, et al. No. 02-1689 Certiorari to the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Question presented: Whether one party to a lawsuit can establish diversity jurisdiction after the litigation commences. For petitioner: William Boyce, Fulbright & Jaworski, Houston. For respondents: Roger Greenberg, Schwartz Junell Greenberg & Oathout, Houston. Docket Watch is written by Legal Times, a Recorder affiliate based in Washington, D.C.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.