Narrative Opinion Summary
Motions for leave to file briefs as amici curiae from Agudath Israel of America, Carl Anderson, Commissioner, the United States Catholic Conference, and the Catholic Medical Association have been granted. Certiorari has been granted in the case. The timeline for filings is as follows: the petitioners must file their brief with the Clerk and serve it to opposing counsel by 3 p.m. on November 12, 1996. Respondents are required to file their brief by 3 p.m. on December 10, 1996. Any reply brief must be submitted by 3 p.m. on December 27, 1996. It is noted that this Court’s Rule 29.2 does not apply. The case is scheduled for oral argument along with case No. 96-110, Washington et al. v. Glucksberg et al.
Legal Issues Addressed
Filing Deadlines for Briefssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Court established specific deadlines for the submission of briefs by petitioners, respondents, and for reply briefs.
Reasoning: The timeline for filings is as follows: the petitioners must file their brief with the Clerk and serve it to opposing counsel by 3 p.m. on November 12, 1996. Respondents are required to file their brief by 3 p.m. on December 10, 1996. Any reply brief must be submitted by 3 p.m. on December 27, 1996.
Granting of Amicus Curiae Motionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Court allowed Agudath Israel of America, Carl Anderson, Commissioner, the United States Catholic Conference, and the Catholic Medical Association to file briefs as amici curiae.
Reasoning: Motions for leave to file briefs as amici curiae from Agudath Israel of America, Carl Anderson, Commissioner, the United States Catholic Conference, and the Catholic Medical Association have been granted.
Grant of Certiorarisubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Supreme Court agreed to review the case by granting certiorari.
Reasoning: Certiorari has been granted in the case.
Non-Applicability of Court Rule 29.2subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Court specified that Rule 29.2 does not govern the proceedings in this case.
Reasoning: It is noted that this Court’s Rule 29.2 does not apply.
Scheduling of Oral Argumentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The case is set for oral argument together with Washington et al. v. Glucksberg et al., case No. 96-110.
Reasoning: The case is scheduled for oral argument along with case No. 96-110, Washington et al. v. Glucksberg et al.