Cases


Sitting Docket Title(link to Wiki page) Issue Argument(link to transcript) Decision(link to opinion)
13-1491Cuti v. United StatesWhether a witness may give opinion testimony based in part on specialized knowledge and in part on personal experience, including answering counterfactual hypothetical questions, without satisfying the reliability and disclosure requirements for expert testimony of Federal Rule of Evidence 702, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16, and/or Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. (Opinion by )
13-1314Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting CommissionWhether the provision of the Arizona Constitution that divests the Arizona Legislature of any authority to prescribe congressional district lines violates the Elections Clause of the United States Constitution, which requires that the time, place, and manner of congressional elections be prescribed in each state by the “Legislature thereof.” (Opinion by )
13-1479Khan v. ChowdhuryWhether, where one of the claims submitted to a jury is set aside after trial, a court must vacate the jury's general verdict, or may apply a “harmless error” exception. (Opinion by )
13-1555Parker v. Cooper Tire and Rubber Company(1) Whether an employee must be currently able to work as a condition to the employee's invoking the protections of the anti-retaliation statute in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1140; and (2) whether a federal court may require an employee to prove he or she is currently able to work in order to invoke the protection of the anti-retaliation statute in ERISA when such a requirement is not contained in the statute. (Opinion by )
13-1178Kirby v. Marvel Characters, Inc.(1) Whether a court can constitutionally take copyrights to works originally owned and authored by an independent contractor and hand them to a private party by judicially re-designating them “works for hire;” (2) whether “employer” under the Copyright Act of 1909 can be judicially extended beyond conventional employment to independent contractors, when this contradicts its common law meaning, binding Supreme Court precedent and longstanding canons of statutory construction; and (3) whether “work for hire” can be determined based on post-creation contingencies, like discretionary payment, when authorship and ownership of a copyrightable work, including “work for hire,” vests at inception. (Opinion by )
Term Snapshot
Awards