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.
Eloise ANDERSON, et al., applicants, v. Tamara M. LOERTSCHER., 2017 — 137 S. Ct. 2328 · caselaw · US
General
Eloise ANDERSON, et al., applicants, v. Tamara M. LOERTSCHER.
137 S. Ct. 2328198 L. Ed. 2d 756·Supreme Court of the United States·2017
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
Eloise ANDERSON, et al., applicants,
v.
Tamara M. LOERTSCHER.
No. 16A1224.
Supreme Court of the United States
July 7, 2017.
The application for stay presented to Justice KAGAN and by her referred to the Court granted. The injunction issued by the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, case No. 3:14-cv-00870-jdp, on April 28, 2017, is stayed pending final disposition of the appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Justice GINSBURG and Justice SOTOMAYOR would deny the application for stay.