Skip to main content

Head-to-head

Hastings College Conservation Committee, et al., Petitioners v. California, et al. vs. Sheila Foster, Petitioner v. Robert Jesel, et al. vs. Sheila Hallman-Warner, Petitioner v. Bluefield State College Board of Governors

Business and Regulation cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.

Relationship

Shared issue
Business and Regulation
Why compared
Reviewed Business and Regulation tags connect these current-term public cases.

Questions presented

Hastings College Conservation Committee, et al., Petitioners v. California, et al.
1. Whether a state law that requires a specified name and governance structure for a public college and is enacted in exchange for payment of a specified sum creates binding contractual obligations on the part of that state subject to the protections of the Contract Clause of the U.S. Constitution. 2. Whether state legislation posthumously declaring an individual as having engaged in criminal conduct and, on that basis, stripping benefits secured by state law for that individual and his descendants violates the Bill of Attainder Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Sheila Foster, Petitioner v. Robert Jesel, et al.
1. Whether the six-month statute of limitations for a duty-of-fair-representation claim under the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. § 151 et seq., is subject to equitable tolling when a union and its representatives repeatedly misrepresent that they are pursuing arbitration of an employee's grievance, thereby inducing the employee's reasonable delay in filing suit? 2. Whether a district court abuses its discretion by dismissing a complaint with prejudice on statute-of-limitations grounds, without permitting discovery or leave to amend, when the plaintiff has pleaded specific facts showing ongoing union misrepresentations and diligent inquiry that could support tolling under Del Costello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 462 U.S. 151 (1983), and Fifth Circuit precedent? 3. Whether the Railway Labor Act's duty-of-fair-representation doctrine preempts state-law claims for breach of contract and misrepresentation when those claims arise solely from a union's failure to perform representational duties expressly set forth in a collective-bargaining agreement, or whether courts may instead apply uniform federal standards without selective invocation of preemption or choice-of-law principles?
Sheila Hallman-Warner, Petitioner v. Bluefield State College Board of Governors
1. Whether the Fourteenth Amendment permits a state supreme court to affirm enforcement of a settlement agreement while declining to address properly raised federal constitutional claims challenging retaliation, fraud, and deprivation of due process. 2. Whether due process is violated when a state court refuses to consider newly obtained forensic evidence of alleged fraud in the execution of a settlement agreement. 3. Whether disabled pro se litigants are denied meaningful access to the courts when state courts fail to compel evidence, and fail to address constitutional claims. 4. Whether enforcement of a settlement agreement under state contract law principles may bar consideration of preserved federal constitutional claims where the petitioner alleges coercion arising from retaliatory governmental conduct.

Sources

  • Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.