Supreme Court Rules

/Supreme Court Rules
17 May, 2017

Questions Presented: New Practice Note

2019-03-18T18:47:16-05:00May 17th, 2017|

The most elemental feature of a petition for writ of certiorari is the Questions Presented page. Here the petitioner must concisely set out the basic issues at stake. Experienced Supreme Court practitioners consider a well-crafted Questions Presented to be the most critical tool for gaining cert consideration. In the words of Supreme Court scholar Stephen [...]

16 Jun, 2016

Pick a Court, Any Court

2016-06-16T21:16:54-05:00June 16th, 2016|

The Cockle Blog’s focus in recent weeks on a particular line on U.S. Supreme Court petition covers was not intended as an ongoing, multipart series, but there appear to be more nuances involved than initially apparent.  A question raised when composing every petition (and subsequent brief) cover is which is the correct lower court to [...]

9 Jun, 2016

The Procedural Sidelight of Foster v. Chatman

2019-03-18T18:47:21-05:00June 9th, 2016|Tags: |

While most of the legal community has focused on the substance of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Foster v. Chatman, 578 U.S. ___ (May 23, 2016) (No. 14-8349) (something to do with cluttering up attorney files with notes on jury selection), the Cockle Blog is all over the Court’s procedural focus in that [...]

12 May, 2016

Supreme Court May Clarify (or Muddle) “Discretionary Review”

2019-03-18T18:47:21-05:00May 12th, 2016|

Pending at the U.S. Supreme Court is a “never-before-raised procedural issue,” raised at the Court’s own prompting in “a truly rare move,” that relates to a requirement that everyone filing a petition for certiorari must address every time on the cover. Every petition cover must insert a lower court’s name in the blank in the [...]

22 Apr, 2016

The Making of a Reversal (part 4)

2019-03-18T18:47:22-05:00April 22nd, 2016|

The previous parts of this look at the docket for a major regulatory case that ended with a decision upholding the government tracked the timelines and procedural stages. This final part looks a bit more closely at the several organizations and people who offered their thoughts to the Court without official invitation or direct interest [...]

21 Apr, 2016

The Making of a Reversal (part 3)

2016-04-21T21:46:31-05:00April 21st, 2016|

Merits Stage: Once the Court granted certiorari in the consolidated cases, moving it from the petition phase to the merits phase, the Court’s focus shifted from whether to decide the dispute to how to resolve it. And that called for a whole new round of briefing from the parties and any old or new “friends.” [...]

20 Apr, 2016

The Making of a Reversal (part 2)

2016-04-20T18:59:03-05:00April 20th, 2016|

Petition Stage: The linked regulatory cases that are the subject of this four-part look at the Supreme Court’s docket began in the typical way for any request for certiorari review, with final decisions at the top of a chain of lower courts. On May 23, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of [...]

19 Apr, 2016

The Making of a Reversal (part 1)

2019-03-18T18:47:22-05:00April 19th, 2016|

If you follow a big U.S. Supreme Court case in the news, you see an occasional milestone – certiorari petition filed, cert. granted, oral argument, and the decision – and you hear from the lead counsel for the two sides, along with all the commentary from talking heads. If you follow it on the Court’s [...]

15 Mar, 2016

Petition Appendix (pt 5)

2021-01-12T12:27:30-06:00March 15th, 2016|Tags: |

The first four parts of this series covered the Supreme Court appendix contents that are either required or that are too lengthy to leave in the brief. This final installment addresses a provision that allows pretty much anything, but that should be used with caution. Other Material Believed Essential. Rule 14.1(i)(vi) is the tempting catchall [...]

10 Mar, 2016

Petition Appendix (pt 4)

2021-01-12T12:26:56-06:00March 10th, 2016|

Rehearing Denial. The last required appendix document may or may not exist, but if it does, it goes at the end of the required category. This would be an order denying rehearing by the court that issued the final judgment you are directly challenging. Rule 14.1(i)(iii). Or the last document may be something else, depending [...]