IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Order of January 25, 2016
Writ of Certiorari is granted in the following cases
1) Dunnigan v. Owens, No. 16-1216
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth, Circuit
Case Below: Owens v. Baltimore City States Attorney, 767 F.3d 379 (4th Cir. 2014)
Question Granted: Whether § 1983 action for failing to disclose evidence under Brady v. Maryland accrues at the time the plaintiff learns about the undisclosed exculpatory evidence, such that a claim filed more than three years after he was granted a new trial.
Note: Dissent below
Counsel of Record: Nicole Carrero; Hannah Nowalk
Court: Kelly Scott; Virginia Guerrero
2) Li v. Demuth, No. 16-1210
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Below: Demuth v. City of Los Angeles, 798 F.3d 837 (9th Cir. 2015)
Question Granted: Whether deputy sheriff who arrested an attorney pursuant to a judicial command that the attorney appear in court was entitled to qualified immunity from suit.
Counsel of Record: Andrew Gordon; Faroat Andasheva
Court: Andrew Vertz; Johanna Talcott
3) Klunder v. Brown University, No. 16-1227
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Case Below: 778 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2015)
Question Granted: Whether a private university acts under color of state law and is subject to constitutional liability for disciplining and suspending student in response to student and staff complaints.
Note: Fact-intensive
Counsel of Record: Kelly Scott; Loren Yudovich
Court: Bobby Joe Bracy; Nicole Carrero
4) P.R.B.A. Corp. v. HMS Host Toll Roads, Inc., No. 16-0526
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Case Below: 808 F.3d 221 (3d Cir. 2015)
Question Granted: Whether private company that leases service plazas from state agencies and controls content of display racks and advertising in the plazas acts under color of state law in removing advertising brochures from common areas.
Note: Fact-intensive
Counsel of Record: Marlon Velez; Michelle Jacobs
Court: Marie Taylor; Jessica Satinoff
5) Meshal v. Higgenbotham, No. 16-0423
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Case Below: 804 F.3d 417 (D.C. Cir. 2015)
Question Presented: Whether an American citizen can bring a Bivens action for damages against federal agents who detained, interrogated, and tortured him outside the United States.
Note: Concurring and dissenting opinions
Counsel of Record: Ariel Rojas; Andrew Vertz
Court: Justin McNealy; Hannah Nowalk
6) Hildebrand v. Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office, No. 16-0520
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Case Below: 757 F.3d 99 (3d Cir. 2014)
Question Granted: Whether a terminated public employee can bring a constitutional claim for age discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, rather than proceeding solely through the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
Note: Circuit split, as discussed.
Counsel of Record: Jessica Satinoff; Virginia Guerrero
Court: Marlon Velez; Faroat Andasheva
7) Reeder v. Madigan, No. 16-1028
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Case Below: 780 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. 2015)
Question Granted: Whether the President of the Illinois Senate enjoyed absolute legislative immunity for denying press credentials to an otherwise-qualified entity.
Note: Fact-intensive
Counsel of Record: Justin McNealy; Bobby Joe Bracy
Court: Michelle Jacobs; Loren Yudovich
8) City of Austin v. Sanchez, No. 16-0120
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Case Below: Sanchez v. City of Austin, 774 F.3d 873 (5th Cir. 2014)
Question Granted: Whether district court properly denied plaintiffs attorneys’ fees where subsequent city policy changes rendered judicial success achieved by plaintiffs of limited duration and of little or no practical effect.
Note: Dissent below.
Counsel of Record: Marie Taylor; Johanna Talcott
Court: Andrew Gordon; Ariel Rojas
9) Dunnigan v. Owens, No. 16-1216
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth, Circuit
Case Below: Owens v. Baltimore City States Attorney, 767 F.3d 379 (4th Cir.2014)
Question Granted: Whether it was clearly established prior to 1988 that due process was violated by police officers failing in bad faith to present exculpatory evidence to the prosecutor.
Note: Dissent below. Second issue in this case; first issue will be argued. Those assigned to the argued issue in this case may write on this second issue.
10) Lopez v. Kent, No. 16-0428
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Case Below: Kent v. Oakland County, ___ F.3d ___, 2016 WL 66566 (6th Cir. 2016)
Question Presented: Whether it was clearly established that use of stun gun constituted excessive force when officers were trying to resuscitate an unconscious victim and plaintiff was interfering with those efforts.
Note: Dissent below.
11) Hinkle v. White, No. 16-0515
On Certiorari from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Case Below: 793 F.3d 764 (7th Cir. 2015)
Question Presented: Whether state police officers violated due process by making false statements about target of criminal investigation to people they were not authorized to speak about the investigation.