| Docket |
Case Name | Issue | Filings |
| 06-1535 |
Hudson
v. Spisak |
Whether the Eighth Amendment
prohibits instructions to a capital jury that its sentencing verdict
must be unanimous, unless the jurors are also instructed that they need
not unanimously agree on the existence of any one particular mitigating
in
weighing whether to impose a death sentence. (CA6) |
Petition,
BIO,
reply |
| 06-1613 |
El-Masri v. United States |
Whether the petitioner's
complaint - alleging abduction, detention and coercive interrogation by
U.S. agents - was properly dismissed at the pleadings stage under the
state secrets privilege. (CA4) |
Petition,
petition
supplement, BIO,
NYC
Bar, Const.
Project, Council
of Europe |
| 07-9 |
Johnson
v. United States |
Whether the stand alone
concurrence of Justice Kennedy or the narrower opinion of the four Justice plurality is the controlling opinion in Rapanos v. United States, 126 S. Ct. 2208 (2006). (CA1) |
Petition,
BIO,
MSLF |
| 07-19 |
Department
of the Army v. Kirkendall |
Whether the 15-day statutory
time limit for filing an appeal with the
Merit Systems Protection Board from a decision of the Secretary of
Labor denying a complaint under the Veterans Employment Opportunities
Act of 1998, 5 U.S.C. 3330a(d), is subject to equitable tolling. (CAFC) |
Petition,
BIO |
| 07-72 |
Coloian
v. United States |
Whether a federal district court
has inherent or ancillary jurisdiction
to expunge judicial criminal records based on equitable considerations.
(CA1) |
Petition,
BIO |
| 07-94 |
Middleton v. Trustees of the Southern California Bakery Drivers Security Fund | Whether, under ERISA, plan
assets used to
purchase a product or service from an independent third party may
retain their characterization as plan assets after being paid to that
third party pursuant to a contract, and whether contributions made to a
multi-employer employee welfare plan on behalf
of a particular group of plan participants may not be used for the
benefit of other plan participants. (CA9) |
Petition,
BIO |
| 07-138 |
Microsoft
v. Odom |
Whether an association-in-fact
“enterprise” under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, must be an organization with an
ascertainable structure
separate and apart from that inherent in the alleged pattern of
racketeering activity, and whether a group of corporations can
constitute an association-in-fact RICO enterprise. (CA9) |
Petition,
BIO,
Chamber |
| 07-142 |
Memorial Day Weekend Salute to Veterans
Corporation v. Wickersham |
Whether non-governmental
organizers of public events and festivals - here, a Memorial Day air
show - may qualify as “state actors” under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (CA8) |
Petition,
BIO,
ICAS |