This memo involves my initial comments upon reading the Court’s Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification dated January 23, 2017. The denial of the class claim for damages here can be disgusted in future cases because Indiana has a compulsory counterclaim rule, unlike Pennsylvania, New York State or the Federal Courts (which has a permissive rule on counterclaims). Where the Defendant teachers needed to bring its claim in the Indiana Class Action, or lose it to the compulsory counterclaim rule, that is simply not the case with Defendants in the repo notice class actions we bring in PA, NY or Federal Court. See Cosgrove v. Citizens on this point. I note that this is not the type of opinion that the Defendants can be entirely happy with as well. The Court did certify for declaratory purposes …show more content…
We may be able to take those consumers from the older class periods and argue that they are not subject to any counterclaims as the statute of limitations on that counterclaim has run. If we do so, we might want to consider amending the complaint to bring claims for a class seeking declaratory relief, including all the class members in the ten year period including those with deficiency balances and subject to counterclaims. A sub-class would involve a claim for damages for those consumers who are not subject to a deficiency set-off or counterclaim. Based on this Court’s opinion I see no reason why that type of Class would not be independently certifiable as it does not suffer from the same infirmities occasioned by the deficiency balances or judgments against some of the class members. A part from these observations, I’ll note that I find the opinion well-written, well-reasoned, and well-supported. I feel as if an interlocutory appeal challenge would not be wise. I do feel as if the opinion does give us some favorable paths to move forward in this
Separate Opinions: in the dissenting opinion, the minority argued that the ruling of the majority opens up a Pandora’s Box. Arguing that the ruling would encourage offenders to flee and, consequently, put more innocent bystanders at risk. In addition to this separate opinion by the dissent, several other key arguments by the dissent are bulleted
The decision in the Gibbons v. Ogden case is, in my opinion, a very just
Also another fact one of the justices, Justice O’Connor disagreed with the outcome of the case. She said it was called a, “Cursory Inspection” she went on saying the officers could do the search based on reasonable suspicion that the object was evidence of a criminal activity.
VI. Opinion: Justice Fortas delivered the opinion of the Court. The Judgment of the Arizona Supreme Court is reversed and the matter remanded. Justices Black and White concurred with the Court’s opinion. Justice Harlan concurred in part and dissented in part; and Justice Stewart dissented based on his opinion that juvenile hearings are not the same as adversary proceedings.
This confirms your assignment as the law clerk with primary responsibility for the above-entitled case. At the moment, a hearing date is not scheduled. However, once the hearing date is scheduled you may be required to prepare a bench memo. I will inform you as soon as the date for oral argument is scheduled.
“The principle of stare decisis does not demand that we must follow precedents, which shipwreck justice.”
...f proofs of false statement made by Pickering, the High School teacher had the right to express his opinion publicly about issues that he considered as important to the society. Because no abuse or offense had been made in the letter, he could not be fired. No punishment could be placed by the S.C because it required more proceeding.
On appeal, Mr. Moreno asserts the district court erred by adding a point to his criminal history for the earlier sentence. Absent the additional point, Mr. Moreno would have been in a lower criminal history category and hence could have been subjected to a shorter sentence. However, because Mr. Moreno failed to raise an objection before the district court regarding the additional point for the September 2001 sentence, his sentencing stood.
Bennett, A., & Brower, A. (2001). ’THAT’S NOT WHAT FERPA SAYS!’: THE TENTH CIRCUIT COURT GIVES DANGEROUS BREADTH TO FERPA IN ITS CONFUSING AND CONTRADICTORY FALVO V. OWASSO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT DECISION. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal, 2, 327.
The process of the judging on this criteria goes like this: First, a business or organization that loses an appeal in the Us court system, they are allowed to file a petition, called a “cert petition” (Savage 981). These petitions explain in thirty pages or less the process, views, and decision of the case. These are then given to the Law Clerks, who create a “cert memo”. This is created when the Clerk rea...
was clear in his dissenting opinion of the current appeal court and the lower court that the area of
An appellate court determined this to be factual and allowed the judge’s ruling to stand.
1). There is no doubt that the effect of the speculations by the highest court in this
views as to whether or not Judicial review, and the Supreme Court as a whole,
...States court of appeals for the tenth circuit. (2009). Supreme Court Cases: The Twenty-first Century (2000 - Present), 1-4. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.2-23-2011.https://login.cyrano.ucmo.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=19084840&site=ehost-live