Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Neil Dupree v. Kevin Younger
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, No. 21-6423 · judgment March 11, 2022
Before the decision, about 3.2× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a circuit split argued in the petition, and a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition).
Question presented
This case presents a clear, recognized, and intractable conflict regarding an important issue related to the preservation of legal claims for appeal. Parties may appeal only from "final decisions of the district courts." 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Thus the general rule is that "[a]n appeal from the final judgment brings up all antecedent issues," In re Kilgus, 811 F.2d 1112, 1115 (7th Cir. 1987), and that "all interlocutory orders are reviewable on appeal from the final decree," Gloria Steamship Co. v. Smith, 376 F.2d 46, 47 (5th Cir. 1967). "Interlocutory orders therefore may be stored up and raised at the end of the case." Kurowski v. Krajewski, 848 F.2d 767, 772 (7th Cir. 1988). Notwithstanding these precepts, the circuits have squarely divided over whether purely legal claims denied at summary judgment are reviewable on appeal after a jury trial where those claims have not been reasserted in a post-trial motion. In the decision below, the Fourth Circuit acknowledged the 8-3-1 circuit split. But the panel declared itself bound by Fourth Circuit precedent and held that it would "not review, under any standard, the pretrial denial of a motion for summary judgment after a full trial and final judgment on the merits, even in circumstances where the issue rejected on summary judgment and not reasserted in a post-trial motion is a purely legal one." That holding was outcome-determinative-the sole basis on which the court refused to consider petitioner's PLRA exhaustion defense-and this case is a perfect vehicle for resolving the widespread disagreement over this important question. The question presented is: Whether to preserve the issue for appellate review a party must reassert in a post-trial motion a purely legal issue rejected at summary judgment.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Andrew Timothy Tutt
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer
For respondent
Amy Mason Saharia
Williams & Connolly LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences
Amicus briefs
2 merits
(2 supporting pet./neither)
Argument & decision
Argued April 24, 2023 — Andrew T. Tutt · Amy M. Saharia. Audio and transcript
Decided May 25, 2023. Opinion by Barrett.
Proceedings
- Jun 26 2023Judgment issued.
- May 25 2023Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Barrett, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
- Apr 24 2023Argued. For petitioner: Andrew T. Tutt, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Amy M. Saharia, Washington, D. C.
- Apr 12 2023Reply of petitioner Neil Dupree filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 29 2023Brief of respondent Kevin Younger filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 24 2023CIRCULATED
- Mar 06 2023Brief amici curiae of Law Professors Joan Steinman, Richard Freer, Nancy Marder, Mark Rosen, Michael Solimine, and Adam Zimmerman filed.
- Mar 06 2023Brief amicus curiae of DRI Center for Law and Public Policy filed.
- Feb 27 2023Brief of petitioner Neil Dupree filed.
- Feb 27 2023Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
- Feb 23 2023Sealed records from the U.S.D.C.-Maryland transmitted electronically. The remaining records are available on PACER.
- Feb 08 2023Record requested from the U.S.C.A.-4th Circuit.
- Feb 08 2023All records from the USCA-4th Circuit are available on PACER. Record request forwarded to the USDC-District of Maryland.
- Jan 31 2023SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, April 24, 2023.
- Jan 13 2023Petition GRANTED.
- Jan 09 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/13/2023.
- Dec 07 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/6/2023.
- Dec 07 2022Reply of petitioner Neil Dupree filed. (Distributed)
- Nov 23 2022Brief of respondent Kevin Younger in opposition filed.
- Oct 12 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 23, 2022.
- Oct 11 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 24, 2022 to November 23, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- Sep 22 2022Response Requested. (Due October 24, 2022)
- Sep 21 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/7/2022.
- Sep 16 2022Waiver of right of respondent Kevin Younger to respond filed.
- Sep 06 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 11, 2022)
- May 17 2022Application (21A734) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until September 5, 2022.
- May 13 2022Application (21A734) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 7, 2022 to September 5, 2022, submitted to The Chief Justice.