On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in two consolidated cases related to the treatment of underwater mortgages in bankruptcy.  I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting up the number of questions. Bank of America NA v. Caulkett asks “whether, under Section 506(d) of the Bankruptcy Code, which provides that ‘[t]o the … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Bank of America Cases →

The Supreme Court heard oral argument two cases on Monday.  I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting up the number of questions.  Both of today’s cases are difficult to predict based on the question count. The first case is an important First Amendment case, Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Walker v. Sons of Confederate Veterans; SF v. Sheehan →

The Supreme Court heard two oral arguments on Tuesday. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After 18 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 66.7% of the time, which means I have fallen off after going 100% correct in the first 6 decisions. The first case, … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in LA v. Patel and Davis v. Ayala →

The Supreme Court heard two oral arguments on Monday. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After 17 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 65% of the time, which means I have fallen off after going 100% correct in the first 6 decisions.  Both of today’s … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in AZ Legislature v. AZ Indep. Redistricting and Ohio v. Clark →

On Tuesday of this past week, the Court heard two oral arguments. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions. After 17 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 65% of the time, which means I have fallen off after going 100% correct in the first 6 decisions. The … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Henderson v. US and Tibble v. Edison Int’l →

The Supreme Court heard two oral arguments on Wednesday.  I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions.  After 17 decisions handed down, my predictions have been correct 65% of the time, which means I have fallen off after going 100% correct in the first 6 decisions. The first case, … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch and Baker Botts v. ASARCO →

On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases.  The Court was somewhat light in asking questions after several weeks off from oral argument. I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting the number of questions.  After going a perfect 6 for 6 in calling the first decisions handed down, I … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Kerry v. Din and Coleman v. Tollefson →

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases on Wednesday. I’m predicting the winners of the Supreme Court cases based on the number of questions asked during oral argument. For more about this method and all of my predictions this Term, click here. Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in TDHCA v. Inclusive Communities Project and Rodriguez v. US →

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases on Tuesday. I’m predicting the winners of the Supreme Court cases based on the number of questions asked during oral argument. For more about this method and all of my predictions this Term, click here.  Both cases are very close calls. Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center and Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar →