PLIVA, INC., ET AL.
v.
MENSING; ACTAVIS ELIZABETH, LLC V. MENSING; ACTAVIS, INC. V. DEMAHY; STERN, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF MARSHALL V. MARSHALL, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF MARSHALL; PARKER V. RICHMOND COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION; GARD ET UX. V. CITY OF OMAHA, NEBRASKA; TALLEY V. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, ET AL.; AGNEW V. SUSSEX CONDOMINIUM UNIT OWNERS ASSN.; CONSTANT V. CALIFORNIA EX REL. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; CAMPBELL V. KELLERMYER BUILDING SERVICES, LLC; CLELLAN V. OHIO; EDWARDS V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BOARD ON PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY; WADSWORTH ET UX. V. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE; DOE V. UNITED STATES; CATO V. SWARTHOUT, WARDEN; FULLER V. SMITH, MONROE V. KRIPPEL ET AL.; SPENCER V. ALABAMA; SIMON V. CITY OF ATLANTA, GEORGIA, ET AL.; MATSUDA V. HAWAII ET AL.; SMITH V. BUSS, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; HENRY V. ALABAMA ET AL.; ROSS V. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, AS RECEIVER OF WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK; QUATTROCCHI V. FLORIDA; VAN ZANT V. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION ET AL.; BOCZKOWSKI V. JACKSON ET AL.; CRISDON V. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; LYTLE V. NORTH CAROLINA; WEINRICH V. ROPER, SUPERINTENDENT, POTOSI CORRECTIONAL CENTER; PETTUS V. UNITED STATES ET AL.; HEINONEN V. SCOTT; SIMON V. GEORGIA ET AL.; HALL V. BERGHUIS, WARDEN; HARRIS V. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY & AGRICULTURAL & MECHANICAL COLLEGE; GOODMAN V. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD; DIGSBY V. BUSS, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; KARUPAIYAN ET AL. V. BROWN ET AL.; CRIM V. BAYSHORE OF NAPLES, INC.; HAMILTON V. UNITED STATES; HEADE V. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY; TALLEY V. CITY OF ATLANTIC CITY, NEW JERSEY, ET AL.; BOZIC V. PENNSYLVANIA; DAVIS V. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; MCPHERRON V. DAILING ET AL.; FIGURA TORREFRANCA V. HORNE, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ARIZONA, ET AL.; AND FIGURA TORREFRANCA V. RYAN, DIRECTOR, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL.; WOODWARD V. KANSAS; BLANCHARD V. BENNETT ET AL.; BOTANY V. HUIBREGTSE, WARDEN; BOOK V. MENDOZA ET AL.; BURGIN V. LAHAYE ET AL.; AKBAR V. PADULA, WARDEN; BRESTLE V. UNITED STATES; BREWINGTON V. WALSH, SUPERINTENDENT, STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AT DALLAS, ET AL.; IN RE POIRIER, JARVIS V. ENTERPRISE FLEET SERVICES & LEASING CO.; HINES V. UNITED STATES

U.S. | 2011-08-15
Nos. 09-993; No. 09-1039; No. 09-1501; No. 10-179; No. 10-1254; No. 10-1260; No. 10-1272; No. 10-1274; No. 10-1275; No. 10-1277; No. 10-1313; No. 10-1315; No. 10-1352; No. 10-7592; No. 10-8294; No. 10-8988; No. 10-9069; No. 10-9085; No. 10-9153; No. 10-9215; No. 10-9235; No. 10-9314; No. 10-9334; No. 10-9341; No. 10-9389; No. 10-9407; No. 10-9428; No. 10-9481; No. 10-9490; No. 10-9516; No. 10-9572; No. 10-9578; No. 10-9625; No. 10-9706; No. 10-9710; No. 10-9720; No. 10-9787; No. 10-9813; No. 10-9816; No. 10-9829; No. 10-9884; No. 10-9893; No. 10-10005; No. 10-10068; No. 10-10095; No. 10-10096; No. 10-10103; No. 10-10104; No. 10-10155; No. 10-10163; No. 10-10166; No. 10-10228; No. 10-10243; No. 10-10327; No. 10-10461; No. 10-10601
564 U.S. 1058 Supreme Court of the United States (2011)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

This is a Supreme Court order disposing of approximately 50 petitions for certiorari and related motions in a single order, denying rehearing across multiple unrelated cases spanning diverse areas of law including pharmaceutical liability, constitutional law, administrative law, and criminal procedure.


Headnotes

[1] Petitions for rehearing are denied when the court does not grant them.

[2] A denial of a petition for rehearing signifies that the court has considered and rejected the request for reconsideration of its prior decision.

Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court

ante, p. 604; ante, p. 604; ante, p. 604; ante, p. 462; ante, p. 1019; ante, p. 1005; ante, p. 1020; 563 U. S. 1022; ante, p. 1020; ante, p. 1020; ante, p. 1039; 563 U. S. 1022; 563 U. S. 1034; ante, p. 1005; 563 U. S. 1035; 563 U. S. 943; 563 U. S. 1009; ante, p. 1022; 563 U. S. 964; 563 U. S. 977; 563 U. S. 977; 563 U. S. 992; ante, p. 1006; 563 U. S. 992; 563 U. S. 993; 563 U. S. 994; 563 U. S. 994; 563 U. S. 995; 563 U. S. 995; ante, p. 1023; 563 U. S. 1010; 563 U. S. 1010; 563 U. S. 996; 563 U. S. 1024; 563 U. S. 1012; 563 U. S. 1024; 563 U. S. 1036; 563 U. S. 1036; 563 U. S. 981; 563 U. S. 1037; 563 U. S. 1037; 563 U. S. 1025; 563 U. S: 1038; ante, p. 1030; ante, p. 1025; 563 U. S. 1038; 563 U. S. 1014; 563 U. S. 1038; ante, p. 1042; 563 U. S. 1038; ante, p. 1009; ante, p. 1043; 563 U. S. 1039; 563 U. S. 1020; ante, p. 1043; and ante, p.

1029. Petitions for rehearing denied. No. 10-1254. No. 10-1260. No. 10-1272. No. 10-1274. No. 10-1275. No. 10-1277. No. 10-1313. No. 10-1315. No. 10-1352. No. 10-7592. No. 10-8294. No. 10-8988. No. 10-9069. No. 10-9085. No. 10-9153. No. 10-9215. No. 10-9235. No. 10-9314. No. 10-9334. No. 10-9341. No. 10-9389. No. 10-9407. No. 10-9428. No. 10-9481. No. 10-9490. No. 10-9516. No. 10-9572. No. 10-9578. No. 10-9625. No. 10-9706. No. 10-9710. No. 10-9720. No. 10-9787. No. 10-9813. No. 10-9816. No. 10-9829. No. 10-9884. No. 10-9893. No. 10-10005. No. 10-10068. No. 10-10095. No. 10-10096. No. 10-10103. No. 10-10104. No. 10-10155. No. 10-10163. No. 10-10166. No. 10-10228. No. 10-10243. No. 10-10327. No. 10-10461. No. 10-10601.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited (41 total)

View all 41 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw