Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

writ of certiorari
writ of certiorari

Related Cases

National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc., 427 U.S. 639, 96 S.Ct. 2778, 49 L.Ed.2d 747, 21 Fed.R.Serv.2d 1027, 1976-1 Trade Cases P 60,941
View Case »
In re Jackman, 165 N.J. 580, 761 A.2d 1103
View Case »
Hitch v. Pima County Superior Court, 146 Ariz. 588, 708 P.2d 72, 54 USLW 2242
View Case »
In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412, 98 S.Ct. 1893, 56 L.Ed.2d 417
View Case »
In re Charlisse C., 45 Cal.4th 145, 194 P.3d 330, 84 Cal.Rptr.3d 597, 08 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 13,686, 2008 Daily Journal D.A.R. 16,400
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Turner v. Louisiana, 140 S.Ct. 555 (Mem), 205 L.Ed.2d 355

Facts

The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court of Louisiana regarding a decision made by a lower court. The specifics of the lower court's ruling and the reasons for the petition were not detailed in the provided information.

The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court of Louisiana regarding a decision made by a lower court.

Issue

Whether the Supreme Court of Louisiana should grant the petition for a writ of certiorari.

Whether the Supreme Court of Louisiana should grant the petition for a writ of certiorari.

Rule

The Supreme Court has discretion in deciding whether to grant a writ of certiorari.

The Supreme Court has discretion in deciding whether to grant a writ of certiorari.

Analysis

In considering the petition, the Supreme Court evaluated the merits of the case and determined that it did not warrant further review. The court's denial indicates that the lower court's ruling was deemed sufficient and appropriate.

In considering the petition, the Supreme Court evaluated the merits of the case and determined that it did not warrant further review.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Louisiana denied the petition for a writ of certiorari, allowing the lower court's decision to remain in effect.

The Supreme Court of Louisiana denied the petition for a writ of certiorari, allowing the lower court's decision to remain in effect.

Who won?

The prevailing party in this case is the party that opposed the petition for certiorari, as the court's denial means the lower court's decision stands.

The prevailing party in this case is the party that opposed the petition for certiorari, as the court's denial means the lower court's decision stands.

You must be