January arguments, day-by-day

By Lyle Denniston
on Nov 8, 2010 at 11:51 am

The Supreme Court on Monday issued the calendar of arguments for the sitting that begins on Jan. 10.  There will be two arguments a day on each of the five days of the session, except for Tuesday, Jan. 18, when there will be three.  The morning sessions begin at 10 a.m.; the one afternoon session will begin at 1 p.m.  The day-by-day listing follows the jump.

Here are the cases to be heard, with a summary of the issues at stake:

Mon., Jan. 10:

Matrixx Initiatives v. Siracusano (09-1156) — drug manufacturer’s liability for securities fraud for failure to disclose drug’s side effects

Montana v. Wyoming and North Dakota (137 Original) — right of a state under a river-regulating compact to consume more water for new irrigation methods (J. Kagan is recused)

Tues., Jan. 11:

J. McIntyre Machinery v. Nicastro (09-1343) — state court authority to decide a case against an overseas company that puts its products into U.S. commerce

Goodyear Luxembourg Tires v. Brown (10-76) — same issue as in 09-1343 (separate argument)

Wed., Jan. 12:

Sykes v. U.S. (09-11311) — fleeing by car from police as a “violent felony” resulting in longer sentence as a career criminal

Kentucky v. King (09-1272) — definition of police authority to enter a home during a “hot pursuit” of a suspect

Mon., Jan. 17 — Legal holiday (no arguments)

Tues., Jan. 18:

General Dynamics v. U.S. (09-1298) and Boeing Co. v. U.S. (09-1302) — validity of “state secrets” doctrine in a defense contract lawsuit (Question 1 in 09-1298 and Question 2 in 09-1302; cases consolidated for one hour of argument)

Smith v. Bayer Corp. (09-1205) — right of absent class members to bring a new class-action lawsuit in state court; due process violation

1 p.m. session: Stern v. Marshall (10-179) — definition of “core proceeding” under federal bankruptcy law (Questions 1, 2 and 3 only)

Wed., Jan. 19:

Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T Inc. (09-1279) — right of corporation to protection of “personal privacy” papers sought under Freedom of Information Act (J. Kagan recused)

Astra USA Inc. v. Santa Clara County (09-1273) — right of health-care providers to sue drug companies for over-pricing of drugs (J. Kagan recused)