No. 22-914
Stanley Waleski v. Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, LLP, et al.
Relisted (5)
Tags: circuit-split civil-procedure federal-courts federal-jurisdiction hypothetical-jurisdiction judicial-domain standing state-law-claims steel-co-v-citizens-for-a-better-env't subject-matter-jurisdiction
Latest Conference:
2023-06-22
(distributed 5 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a federal court may assume "hypothetical" subject matter jurisdiction to reach a decision on issues of state law against the party challenging the court's jurisdiction, when the very issue presented on appeal is that of federal subject matter jurisdiction.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a federal court may assume 'hypothetical' subject matter jurisdiction to reach a decision on issues of state law against the party challenging the court's jurisdiction
Docket Entries
2023-09-08
Rehearing DENIED.
2023-08-17
DISTRIBUTED.
2023-07-21
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2023-06-26
Petition DENIED. Justice Thomas, with whom Justice Gorsuch and Justice Barrett join, dissenting from the denial of certiorari. (Detached Opinion)
2023-06-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/22/2023.
2023-06-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/15/2023.
2023-06-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/8/2023.
2023-05-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/1/2023.
2023-05-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/25/2023.
2023-05-08
Reply of petitioner Stanley Waleski filed. (Distributed)
2023-04-19
Brief of respondents Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads LLP, et al. in opposition filed.
2023-03-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 19, 2023)
Attorneys
Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads LLP, et al.
Robert Paul Johnson — Thompson Hine LLP, Respondent
Stanley Waleski
Melanie L. Cyganowski — Otterbourg P.C., Petitioner