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.
RIO TINTO PLC, et al., petitioners, v. Alexis Holyweek SAREI, et al., 2013 — 569 U.S. 945 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
RIO TINTO PLC, et al., petitioners, v. Alexis Holyweek SAREI, et al.
569 U.S. 945185 L. Ed. 2d 863·Supreme Court of the United States·2013
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
RIO TINTO PLC, et al., petitioners,
v.
Alexis Holyweek SAREI, et al.
No. 11-649.
Supreme Court of the United States
April 22, 2013.
Motion of Government of Australia, et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Motion of Professors of International Law, Foreign Relations Law and Federal Jurisdiction for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Motion of Washington Legal Foundation, et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Motion of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Motion of National Foreign Trade Council, et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 569 U.S. ----, 133 S.Ct. 1659, 185 L.Ed.2d 671 (2013).
Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions and this petition.