top of page
Search

Today in Supreme Court History: December 5

  • Writer: captcrisis
    captcrisis
  • Dec 5, 2024
  • 1 min read

Lopez v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 47 (decided December 5, 2006): felony under state law which is only a misdemeanor under federal law is not “a felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act” (18 U.S.C. §924(c)(2)) (here, abetting possession of cocaine) and therefore deportation is only discretionary


Things Remembered, Inc. v. Petrarca, 516 U.S. 124 (decided December 5, 1995): order remanding after removal is not appealable (once it’s out of federal court, it’s gone) (wrinkle here was that remand was to bankruptcy court, not state court, but bankruptcy court had no choice but to remand further to state court)


Pavelic & LeFlore v. Marvel Entertainment, 493 U.S. 120 (decided December 5, 1989): Rule 11 sanctions for a frivolous pleading are to be awarded against the attorney who signed it, not his law firm (Scalia cites text of Rule; in dissent Marshall emphasizes trial judge’s right to control his courtroom, and that trial judge penalized both attorney and firm) (if you want to see an extreme example of Rule 11 “satellite litigation” during those mean years, check out Cooter & Gell v. Hartmax, 1990) (in 1996 or so my adversary once threatened me with a Rule 11 motion for proposing to ask the judge for permission to move for summary judgment)

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
Today in Supreme Court History: February 4

Dice v. Akron, Canton & Youngstown R.R. Co. , 342 U.S. 359 (decided February 4, 1952): release of personal injury defendant sued under Federal Employers’ Liability Act is determined by federal, not st

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: February 3

Germany v. Philipp , 592 U.S. 169 (decided February 3, 2021): Foreign Sovereignty Immunities Act barred suit in U.S. courts by Holocaust survivors to recover value of property they were forced to sell

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: February 2

Dartmouth College v. Woodward , 17 U.S. 518 (decided February 2, 1819): state attempt to change existing charter of college to turn it into a public institution violated Contracts Clause; corporate en

 
 
 

Comments


Thanks for submitting!

bottom of page