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

motionamicus curiaerespondentrelevance
motionamicus curiaerespondentrelevance

Related Cases

Evans v. Jeff D., 475 U.S. 717, 106 S.Ct. 1531, 89 L.Ed.2d 747, 40 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 860, 40 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 36,087, 54 USLW 4359, 4 Fed.R.Serv.3d 321
View Case »
In re Sills Cummis Zuckerman, Radin Tischman Epstein & Gross, 192 N.J. 222, 927 A.2d 1249 (Mem)
View Case »
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dabney, 73 F.3d 262, 64 USLW 2401, 33 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1061
View Case »
Aiken v. Business and Industry Health Group, Inc., 885 F.Supp. 1474, 130 Lab.Cas. P 57,996, 10 IER Cases 995
View Case »
Howard v. America Online Inc., 208 F.3d 741, RICO Bus.Disp.Guide 9872, 00 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2454, 2000 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3307, 20 Communications Reg. (P&F) 130
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 549 U.S. 1018, 127 S.Ct. 575 (Mem), 166 L.Ed.2d 408, 75 USLW 3247

Facts

The Solicitor General filed a motion seeking permission to participate in the oral argument as amicus curiae, which would allow them to provide additional insights or perspectives on the case. The respondents also filed a motion requesting divided argument, which was ultimately denied by the court. These motions were part of the procedural aspects of the case as it moved towards oral arguments.

The Solicitor General filed a motion seeking permission to participate in the oral argument as amicus curiae, which would allow them to provide additional insights or perspectives on the case.

Issue

Whether the Solicitor General should be allowed to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and whether the respondents' motion for divided argument should be granted.

Whether the Solicitor General should be allowed to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and whether the respondents' motion for divided argument should be granted.

Rule

The court has the discretion to allow participation of amici curiae in oral arguments and to determine the structure of arguments presented.

The court has the discretion to allow participation of amici curiae in oral arguments and to determine the structure of arguments presented.

Analysis

In considering the motions, the court evaluated the relevance and potential contribution of the Solicitor General's participation to the case. The court found that allowing the Solicitor General to participate would be beneficial, while the respondents' request for divided argument did not meet the necessary criteria for approval.

In considering the motions, the court evaluated the relevance and potential contribution of the Solicitor General's participation to the case.

Conclusion

The court granted the Solicitor General's motion and denied the respondents' motion for divided argument.

The court granted the Solicitor General's motion and denied the respondents' motion for divided argument.

Who won?

The Solicitor General prevailed in the case due to the court's recognition of the value of their input as amicus curiae.

The Solicitor General prevailed in the case due to the court's recognition of the value of their input as amicus curiae.

You must be