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.
In re Evans; Peterson v. Seaman; Birdette v. Georgia Department of Transportation; Junfeng Han et al. v. Jianong Guo et al.; Fisher v. Vizioncore, Inc., et al.; Aref v. Hickman et al., 2012 — 566 U.S. 903 · caselaw · US
General
In re Evans; Peterson v. Seaman; Birdette v. Georgia Department of Transportation; Junfeng Han et al. v. Jianong Guo et al.; Fisher v. Vizioncore, Inc., et al.; Aref v. Hickman et al.
566 U.S. 903·Supreme Court of the United States·2012
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
No. 11-8363.
No. 11-8384.
No. 11-8406.
No. 11-8501.
No. 11-8505.
No. 11-8521.
In re Evans; Peterson v. Seaman. Birdette v. Georgia Department of Transportation. Junfeng Han et al. v. Jianong Guo et al. Fisher v. Vizioncore, Inc., et al. Aref v. Hickman et al.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 11th Cir.; C. A. llth Cir.;
Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist.;
C. A. 7th Cir.; and
C. A. 9th Cir. Motions of petitioners for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioners are allowed until April 16, 2012, within which to pay the docketing fees required by Rule 38(a) and to submit petitions in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.