Skip to main content

Supreme Court Practice, 10th Edition

Bloomberg BNA has recently published the 10th Edition of Supreme Court Practice, by Stephen M Shapiro, Kenneth S. Geller, Timothy S. Bishop, Edward A. Hartnett, and Dan Himmelfarb, which is essential for the practitioner, scholar, and pro se patron alike. This treatise, which has been updated to reflect the U.S. Supreme Court's new rules, contains a convenient checklist that summarizes the Supreme Court rules regarding processing cases (including limits on document length and color covers). The authors provide a detailed overview of the U.S. Supreme Court and examine the court's jurisdiction to review federal and state appellate cases.  This book covers petitioning the Supreme Court for writ of certiorari, discussing the process involved and the different factors that the court considers in accepting these cases along with the detailed framework of such petitions. Other matters such as extraordinary writs, briefs on the merits, oral arguments, and admission to practice before the court are reviewed. The 450 page book contains several appendices including Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States, Clerk's Guidelines Regarding Filing Cases and those selected for review, admission to the bar, applicable statutes and regulations, and select forms. A detailed table of contents and index are also included. Supreme Court Practice is now available in the law library, currently in the titles shelf across from the reference desk.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires