No. 20-1619
Expensify, Inc. v. Eddie White
Response Waived
Experienced Counsel
Tags: americans-with-disabilities-act civil-rights declaratory-judgment dignitary-interests due-process free-speech mootness ninth-circuit nominal-damages standing
Key Terms:
Arbitration SocialSecurity ERISA Trademark Copyright Patent Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri ClassAction
Arbitration SocialSecurity ERISA Trademark Copyright Patent Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri ClassAction
Latest Conference:
2021-06-10
Question Presented (from Petition)
(No. 17,322) The question presented is whether Uzuegbunam merits summarily granting the petition, vacating the judgment, and remanding to determine whether the Ninth Circuit's holding, which took a narrow view of the availability of nominal damages, is inconsistent with this Court's intervening precedent, which took a substantially broader view of nominal damages.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski merits summarily granting the petition, vacating the judgment, and remanding to determine whether the Ninth Circuit's holding is inconsistent with this Court's intervening precedent
Docket Entries
2021-06-14
Petition DENIED.
2021-05-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/10/2021.
2021-05-20
Waiver of right of respondent Eddie White to respond filed.
2021-05-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 18, 2021)
Attorneys
Eddie White
Gary F. Lynch — Carlson Lynch LLP, Respondent
Expensify, Inc.
Glenn Ari Danas — Robins Kaplan LLP, Petitioner