Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Beer et al. v. United States, 2011 — 564 U.S. 1050 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Beer et al. v. United States
564 U.S. 1050·Supreme Court of the United States·2011
Justice Breyer would grant the petition for writ of certiorari and set the case for argument.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
June 28, 2011
No. 09-1395.
Beer et al. v. United States.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for consideration of tho queotion of preclusion raised by the Acting Solicitor General in his brief for the United States filed July 26, 2010. The Court considers it important that there be a decision on the question, rather than that an answer be deemed unnecessary in light of prior precedent on the merits. Further proceedings after decision of the preclusion question are for the Court of Appeals to determine in the first instance.
Justice Breyer would grant the petition for writ of certiorari and set the case for argument.
[DISSENT — Justice Scalia,]
Justice Scalia,
dissenting.
It has been my consistent view, not always shared by the Court, that “we have no power to oct aside the duly recorded judgments of lower courts unless we find them to be in error, or unless they are cast in doubt by a factor arising after they were rendered.” Webster v. Cooper, 558 U. S. 1039, 1041-1042 (2009) (dissenting opinion). Today’s vacatur resembles that in Youngblood v. West Virginia, 547 U. S. 867 (2006) (per curiam), from which I dissented, id., at 870. I would grant the petition and set the case for argument.