UCHastings Instagram

          Ice Cream Break with Rosanna Marrero Neagle ’81, VP of Legal Affairs for Nestlé Dreyer’s Ice Cream Company! More at uchastings.edu/news.
          Instagram Photo Likes chrisdoelling, brianna_ricque, gabriellemasse and 5 others like this.
          Thursday, November 07, 2013

          Professors Dodson, Little Add Context and Clarity to Pending Supreme Court Cases via SCOTUSBlog Commentary

          SCOTUSBlog is the most widely-read and relied upon resource for all things related to the US Supreme Court.

          With the new Supreme Court term well under way, UC Hastings Professors are chiming in to add context and clarity to some of the Court’s early cases for SCOTUSBlog, the most widely-read and trusted resource about the US Supreme Court.

          Scott DodsonProfessor Scott Dodson offered a pre-argument summary in Sprint Communications, Inc. v. Jacobs, the day before oral arguments were heard at the Court, and then a post-argument summary of how the litigants presented their positions. "The argument seemed more one-sided than a two-headed penny," Dodson wrote. "Counsel for petitioner Sprint faced only fifteen questions, while counsel for respondent IUB faced around forty. Further, the Justices took up only seventy-seven transcript lines of Sprint’s 456 total but a whopping 217 of the IUB’s 514. Look for a unanimous reversal from the Court in short order," he predicted.

          Rory LittleProfessor Rory Little has offered a similar preview for Fernandez v. California, a criminal procedure case garnering significant attention in the press. You can read his complete preview here.

          Professor Little also offered an opinion analysis for Burt v. Titlow, the first full criminal law case of the new term. "Titlow presented various follow-on questions after two 2012 decisions, which extended ineffective assistance of counsel doctrine to the plea bargaining context," Little wrote. "But the Court’s nine-to-zero ruling (with Justice Sotomayor filing a separate concurrence and Justice Ginsburg concurring only in the judgment) did not resolve most of those follow-up questions. Instead, the Court was plainly more concerned about the Sixth Circuit’s failure to apply the 'doubly deferential' standards of federal habeas corpus law."

          ##

          Go to News Archive

          Share this Story

          Share via Facebook
          Share via TwitterShare via EmailPrint Friendly Version

          Other Recent Stories/ RSS

          Tuesday, July 28, 2015

          Ice Cream Break with Rosanna Marrero Neagle ’81

          We took a moment to catch up with this Board of Trustees member on a hot July afternoon in Oakland.
          Tuesday, July 28, 2015

          Prof. Feldman Advises House Judiciary Committee Members & Staff on Pending Patent Reform Bill, AKA Innovation Act

          “We are speeding down the road and we are going much faster than when this whole thing started.”
          Monday, July 20, 2015

          Q & A with Kevin Sciarani '14

          This recent grad is excelling at Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, one of the nation's top securities litigation firms.
          Thursday, July 16, 2015

          Thinkers & Doers: July 16, 2015

          UC Hastings community members in the news and making moves, July 2, 2015 - July 16, 2015.
          Wednesday, July 15, 2015

          Bringing in the Sabbath at San Quentin

          Rising 2L and Hastings Jewish Law Students Association President Jacob Erez reports.
          Go to News Archive