Relist Watch
on May 6, 2016 at 8:20 am
John Elwood (barely) reviews Monday’s relisted cases.
In past years, we’ve commemorated Derby Week with a julep-fueled effort to outwork ourselves by fitting as many ridiculous names as possible into a post. It’s not our destiny to have such a dazzling gem this year; though we have mor spirit than ever, the creator of this feature has les time; I’m no exaggerator when I say that all my time must be devoted to argument prep, and I don’t have a whit more to spare. While I’ve enjoyed my break, happily, this should be the last of these short-form posts. My busy period is ending, and Tom’s ready for the regular Relist Watch to begin again. That means that when the Court returns with new orders on May 16 (perhaps with some opinions from my man Sam?), the fellowship of our readers will briefly break out the cherry wine to celebrate the return of cat videos and strained attempts at humor about sudden breaking news – swiftly followed by the sinking feeling that Relist Watch was never that funny. With that cheery introduction, here we go . . .
Was relisted; cert. denied over dissent
[page]15-8119[/page] (relisted after the Apr. 22 Conference)
Was relisted; cert. granted in cases with facts press understandably finds humorous
[page]15-866[/page] (relisted after the Apr. 15 and Apr. 22 Conferences)
[page]15-927[/page] (relisted after the Apr. 22 Conference)
Was relisted; likely held (same issue as SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products)
[page]15-998[/page] (relisted after the Apr. 22 Conference)
Was relisted; no action taken yet – likely relisted again (but issue uncertain because the Court’s dockets have not been updated)
[page]15-833[/page] (relisted after the Apr. 1, Apr. 15, and Apr. 22 Conferences; likely relisted after Apr. 29 Conference)
[page]15-789[/page] (relisted after the Apr. 22 Conference; likely relisted after Apr. 29 Conference)
Apparent new relist
[page]15-861[/page] (rescheduled after Apr. 15 and 22 Conferences; likely relisted after Apr. 29 Conference)
Serial relists raising Montgomery v. Louisiana issues that apparently notched yet another relist
Johnson v. Manis, 15-1
Knotts v. Alabama, 15-6284
Adams v. Alabama, 15-6289
Flowers v. Alabama, 15-6306
Slaton v. Alabama, 15-6300
Barnes v. Alabama, 15-6904, 15-6905
Bonds v. Alabama, 15-6290
Rescheduled cases for which we make an exception to our normal rule about not discussing rescheduled cases
[page]14-915[/page] (rescheduled before the Apr. 29 Conference, still with no new Conference date)
[Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondents in this case.]
Thanks to Bryan U. Gividen for compiling the cases, and in the process, largely drafting this post.
