No. 19-570
Greg Steven Elofson v. Stephanie Bivens, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: circuit-split clayton-act judicial-economy nationwide-service nationwide-service-of-process process rico rico-statute rico-venue-process standard-oil standard-oil-co venue venue-process
Latest Conference:
2020-01-10
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Does the RICO venue and process statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1965, provide for nationwide service of process under § 1965(d), consistent with the Clayton Act and this Court's construction of the 'ends of justice" language in Standard Oil Co., or under § 1965(b), as four circuits have held by opting for judicial economy?
2. Whether plenary guardianship executed by reason of a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease is unconstitutional as applied.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the RICO venue and process statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1965, provide for nationwide service of process?
Docket Entries
2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-11-25
Waiver of right of respondent Paul Theut to respond filed.
2019-11-22
Waiver of right of respondent Steven Mudd to respond filed.
2019-11-12
Waiver of right of respondent Stephanie Bivens to respond filed.
2019-10-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 2, 2019)
Attorneys
Greg Steven Elofson
Greg Steven Elofson — Petitioner
Paul Theut
Shane M. Cahill — Long & Levit, LLP, Respondent
Stephanie Bivens
Betsy Spalding Kimball — Klinedinst, Respondent
Steven Mudd