SCOTUScast 12-16-14 featuring Erik Zimmerman Erik Zimmerman December 17, 2014
On December 9, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Gelboim v. Bank of America Corporation. This case concerns whether and in what circumstances the dismissal of all claims in one civil action that has been consolidated with other cases for pre-trial purposes through Multi-District Litigation, is final and immediately appealable?
To discuss the case, we have Erik Zimmerman, who is an Olin-Searle-Smith Fellow and Constitutional Law Center Fellow at Stanford Law School. SCOTUScast 10-22-14 featuring Rachel Paulose
Rachel K. Paulose October 22, 2014
On October 8, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Warger v. Shauers. The question in this case is whether, under Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b), a party moving for a new trial may rely upon juror testimony regarding statements made during deliberations that suggest juror dishonesty during voir dire (the process by which potential jurors are questioned in order to determine if they are suitable to serve on a particular jury).
To discuss the case, we have Rachel Paulose, who is a former Senate confirmed United States Attorney. SCOTUScast 10-20-14 featuring Kristen Osenga
Kristen Osenga October 20, 2014
On October 15, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. This case concerns whether a district court’s factual finding in support of its construction of a patent claim term may be reviewed de novo, as the Federal Circuit requires (and as the panel explicitly did in this case), or only for clear error, as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) requires.
To discuss the case, we have Prof. Kristen Osenga, who is a Professor of Law at the University of Richmond School of Law. SCOTUScast 10-15-14 featuring Tyler Green
Tyler Green October 15, 2014
On October 7, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company, LLC v. Owens. The question in this case was whether a defendant seeking removal to federal court is required to include evidence supporting federal jurisdiction in the notice of removal, or whether it is enough to allege the required “short and plain statement of the grounds for removal.”
To discuss the case, we have Tyler Green, who is Associate Chief Counsel at the U.S. Chamber's Litigation Center.