Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Samuel Gonzales v. ConocoPhillips Company, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 19-20285, 19-20467 · judgment April 3, 2020
Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Fifth Circuit decision below, counsel with five or more prior petitions here, and a circuit split argued in the petition, and down for a business respondent.
Questions presented
-
Whether and to what extent district courts must consider ERISA’s purpose “to protect *** the interests of participants in employee benefit plans and their beneficiaries,” 29 U.S.C. § 1001(b), in exercising their discretion to award attorney’s fees to a successful defendant under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1).
-
Whether the burden-shifting framework established by McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) for proving discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., which is “designed to assure that the plaintiff [has] his day in court despite the unavailability of direct evidence,” Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111, 121 (1985) (internal quotation omitted), applies when the plaintiff can prove discrimination by direct evidence. (I)
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Joseph Carl Cecere
Cecere, PC
For respondent
Joy M. Soloway
Norton, Rose, Fulbright, US LP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Dec 14 2020Petition DENIED. Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
- Nov 24 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.
- Nov 18 2020Waiver of right of respondent ConocoPhillips Company; Frank Alexander; Dan Mecham; ConocoPhillips Severance Pay Plan to respond filed.
- Nov 06 2020Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 10, 2020)