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.
Arizona et al. v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Corp. et al. , Real Parties in Interest), 1983 — 459 U.S. 1191 · caselaw · US
General
Arizona et al. v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Corp. et al. , Real Parties in Interest)
459 U.S. 1191·Supreme Court of the United States·1983
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. 82-675.
Arizona et al. v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Corp. et al. , Real Parties in Interest).
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 9th Cir. Four Members of the Court have disqualified themselves in this case. Because of this absence of a quorum, 28 U. S. C. § 1, and since a majority of the qualified Justices are of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of Court, the judgment and order are affirmed under 28 U. S. C. §2109, which provides that under these circumstances “the court shall enter its order affirming the judgment of the court from which the case was brought for review with the same effect as upon affirmance by an equally divided court.”