Skip to main content
Supreme Court Case TrackerThe Court, in plain English

By term

October Term 2010 (2010–2011)

15 casesRecap
  • Before Arguments0
  • Awaiting Decision0
  • Decided15
  • Dismissed0
15 of 15 tracked cases in October Term 2010 (2010–2011) have a decision on the record.

Term tracker

Every published case, by stage

Decided Cases

15
DecidedFree lawyers in contempt hearingsMichael D. Turner v. Rebecca L. RogersBecause the parent seeking child support had no lawyer, South Carolina could leave Turner without one only if it used safeguards to check his ability to pay. The Court found Turner’s incarceration violated due process because he lacked both protections, wiped out the state ruling (vacated it), and sent the case back (remanded).Decided 10-10DecidedProof needed to invalidate patentsMicrosoft Corporation v. i4i Limited Partnershipi4i sued Microsoft, claiming a custom XML editor in some versions of Word infringed its patent; Microsoft argued that the patent was invalid. The Supreme Court agreed with the lower court that a party challenging a patent must prove it invalid with clear and convincing evidence—strong, highly persuasive proof.Decided 10-290DecidedStock fraud class actionsErica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co.Investors suing Halliburton over alleged securities fraud sought to proceed as a group, raising whether they had to prove the alleged fraud caused a stock-price drop first. The Supreme Court said they did not, wiped out the lower court’s ruling (vacated it), and sent the case back (remanded it).Decided 09-1403DecidedState immigration hiring lawsChamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. Michael B. WhitingBusiness and civil-rights groups challenged Arizona rules requiring employers to check workers’ eligibility through a federal database and allowing business-license revocation for hiring unauthorized workers. The Supreme Court agreed with the Ninth Circuit (affirmed its judgment), leaving that judgment in place.Decided 09-115DecidedKilling witnesses to stop testimonyCharles Andrew Fowler, aka Man v. United StatesCharles Fowler’s federal witness-tampering conviction arose from the killing of Officer Christopher Horner. The Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors had to show a reasonable likelihood that relevant information would have been communicated to a federal officer, wiped out the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling, and sent the case back for further proceedings (vacated and remanded).Decided 10-5443DecidedGeneral Dynamics Corp. v. United StatesThe U.S. government sued defense contractors for breach of contract, but the contractors could not defend themselves without revealing classified information. The Supreme Court ruled that when the state secrets privilege prevents a contractor from raising a valid defense, the courts must dismiss the case and leave the parties where they were.Decided 09-1298DecidedState agencies suing officialsVirginia Office for Protection and Advocacy v. James W. Stewart, III, Commissioner, Virginia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental ServicesThe Virginia Office for Protection and Advocacy sued Virginia officials, alleging they violated federal law by refusing it access to state records and seeking a forward-looking court order. The Supreme Court ruled that a federal court may hear this kind of suit by one state agency against its own state’s officials, overturned the appeals court’s ruling (reversed it), and sent the case back (remanded it).Decided 09-529DecidedSpoken wage complaintsKevin Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics CorporationKevin Kasten alleged that Saint-Gobain fired him for complaining about the placement of its time clocks. The Supreme Court ruled that the Fair Labor Standards Act protects oral as well as written complaints, wiped out the Seventh Circuit’s ruling (vacated it), and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded it) without deciding whether Saint-Gobain retaliated unlawfully.Decided 09-834DecidedGlen Scott Milner v. Department of the NavyMilner sought Navy maps and data about explosions from training exercises under the Freedom of Information Act. The Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s decision allowing withholding under Exemption 2, which covers employee and human-resources records, and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded); whether another exception permits withholding remains unresolved.Decided 09-1163DecidedDeadlines to challenge convictionsJames Walker, Warden v. Charles W. MartinCharles Martin sought federal review of claims after California courts rejected his state habeas petitions under a rule requiring prompt filing. The Supreme Court unanimously overturned the Ninth Circuit, ruling that California’s filing rule can prevent federal courts from granting habeas relief.Decided 09-996DecidedTaxes on railroad fuelCSX Transportation, Inc. v. Alabama Department of RevenueCSX challenged Alabama’s sales and use taxes on diesel fuel, which applied to railroads but exempted competing transportation businesses. The Supreme Court ruled that federal railroad law lets CSX bring the challenge, overturned the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling (reversed it), and sent the case back to that court (remanded); it did not decide whether the taxes discriminate.Decided 09-520DecidedPrivacy in background checksNational Aeronautics and Space Administration v. Robert M. NelsonThe Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s ruling (reversed) and sent the case back to it (remanded), deciding that—even assuming the questions implicated a constitutional privacy interest—that interest did not bar reasonable questions in background checks protected by the Privacy Act’s safeguards against public disclosure. NASA’s checks asked contractor employees about recent illegal drug use and related counseling or treatment, and asked their references whether they had reason to believe the employees were unsuited for work in a federal facility.Decided 09-530DecidedChallenging confessions before a pleaJeff Premo, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary v. Randy Joseph MooreRandy Moore argued that his lawyer should have asked the court to exclude his confession before he pleaded no contest to murder. The Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s order granting Moore relief in his challenge to his imprisonment and sent the case back (reversed and remanded), ruling he was not entitled to that relief.Decided 09-658DecidedDefense lawyers and blood evidenceKelly Harrington, Warden v. Joshua RichterJoshua Richter asked federal courts to review his claim that his trial lawyer should have consulted blood evidence before trial. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the lawyer was ineffective; it ruled that federal limits on relief for state prisoners apply even when a state court gives no reasons, wiped out the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, and sent the case back (reversed and remanded).Decided 09-587DecidedCar costs in bankruptcyJason M. Ransom v. FIA Card Services, N.A., fka MBNA America Bank, N.A.The dispute over Jason Ransom’s Chapter 13 repayment plan was whether a debtor could subtract standard car-ownership costs from income available for plan payments without making car-loan or lease payments. The Supreme Court ruled that a debtor who makes no such payments cannot take the deduction and agreed with the Ninth Circuit’s ruling.Decided 09-907