Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Andrew Hall, et al. v. Jose Flores, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 14-56832 · judgment October 11, 2017

Certiorari denied · April 16, 2018

Pre-decision estimate: 6% cert probability (95% interval 5%–8%)

Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Ninth Circuit decision below, a circuit split argued in the petition, and a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and down for a petition filed soon after the judgment below.

Questions presented

Whether the Ninth Circuit, in conflict with Jett v. Dallas Independent School Dist., 491 U.S. 701, 724
and nine federal circuits, erroneously permits direct suits under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against individual state actors instead of requiring prosecution of such claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Whether municipal employees can be held liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 for impairing rights under a contract to which they are not actually parties, in light of Domino’s Pizza, Inc. v. McDonald, 546 U.S. 470, 477 (2006).
Whether the Ninth Circuit improperly invaded the province of state law by allowing public employees to bring § 1981 claims for employment discrimination, when, in California, public employment is conferred by statute, not contract.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Justin Reade Sarno
Horvitz & Levy LLP

For respondent
—

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

Apr 16 2018
Petition DENIED.
Mar 28 2018
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/13/2018.
Feb 01 2018
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 9, 2018)