Sorry, it’s taken me awhile to analyze the Michigan v. EPA, which the Supreme Court heard back on March 25.  The case asks whether the Environmental Protection Agency unreasonably refused to consider costs in determining whether it is appropriate to regulate hazardous air pollutants emitted by electric utilities.  I predict a 5-4 decision in favor … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in EPA Cases →

The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Wednesday in Horne v. Department of Agriculture, which asks (1) whether the government’s “categorical duty” under the Fifth Amendment to pay just compensation when it “physically takes possession of an interest in property,” Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, applies only to real property and not to … Continue reading Predicting the Winner in Horne v. Dept. of Agriculture →

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in one case on Tuesday, McFadden v. U.S., which asks whether, to convict a defendant of distribution of a controlled substance analogue – a substance with a chemical structure that is “substantially similar” to a schedule I or II drug and has a “substantially similar” effect on the user … Continue reading Predicting the Winner in McFadden v. US →

The Supreme Court heard one oral argument on Monday in Johnson v. United States, which asks whether mere possession of a short-barreled shotgun should be treated as a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act.  This is a very difficult case to predict. As Figure 1 indicates, the total question count is very close: … Continue reading Predicting the Winner in Johnson v. US →

The Supreme Court heard two bankruptcy cases on Wednesday. The first case, Harris v. Viegelahn, asks whether, when a debtor in good faith converts a bankruptcy case to Chapter 7 after confirmation of a Chapter 13 plan, undistributed funds held by the Chapter 13 trustee are refunded to the debtor (as the Third Circuit held … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Harris v. Viegelahn and Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank →

The Supreme Court heard two oral arguments in patent cases on Tuesday.   I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting up the number of questions. The first case, Commil USA v. Cisco Systems, asks whether the Federal Circuit erred in holding that a defendant’s belief that a patent is invalid is a … Continue reading Predicting the Winners in Commil v. Cisco and Kimble v. Marvel →

The Supreme Court held only one oral argument on Monday.   I’m predicting the winners based on the method of counting up the number of questions.  After a very successful start of the Term (7 of 9 correct in the first month), my prediction percentage has slipped considerably to 52%,  so you should take everything … Continue reading Predicting the Winner in Brumfield v. Cain →

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 →