Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Larry Rice v. Interfood, Inc., et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 17-1886 · judgment January 22, 2018

Certiorari denied · June 18, 2018

Pre-decision estimate: 0% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

When an Opinion states that a complaint is barred by a statute of limitations because Plaintiff knew about the incident years before it happened, does Due Process demand that the case be remanded for at least some minimal explanation as to the basis for the decision? Does a claim barred by a statute of limitations also bar future similar but unrelated claims? Can an "agreement" be enforced in Summary Judgment when the non-movant states that it was obtained by fraud and coercion in a proceeding that had no subject matter jurisdiction? Is a complaint valid if it is filed by a lawyer who does not represent the named plaintiff?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Larry Rice

For respondent
Jeffrey L. Schultz
Armstrong Teasdale, LLP

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

Jun 18 2018
Petition DENIED.
May 29 2018
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/14/2018.
May 11 2018
Waiver of right of respondents Interfood, Inc., et al. to respond filed.
Apr 05 2018
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 4, 2018)