-
Contributors
Blogroll
- Above The Law
- Althouse
- Balkinazation
- Becker-Posner Blog
- BLT: The Blog of Legal Times
- Concurring Opinions
- Dorf on Law
- How Appealing
- Law.Com
- Most Strongly Supported
- Prawfsblawg
- Prison Law Blog
- SCOTUS Blog
- Sentencing Law and Policy
- Text & History
- The Confrontation Blog
- The Volokh Conspiracy
- Wait A Second!
- Wall Street Journal Law Blog
Categories
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
The Cockle BurDisclaimer
Any commentary or opinions about cases, legal theory, legal strategy, court procedure, and all other content are the express opinion of their writer and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Cockle Law Brief Printing Co (“Cockle Law”), Cockle Bur, Inc. (“Cockle Bur”) its employees, owners, or users of this site. These commentary and opinions should be relied upon at your own risk. These commentary and opinions are not legal advice.
All information made available at www.Cocklebur.com is for informational purposes only. This website, and all content contained herein, is not meant to provide legal advice or answer specific legal question. It is not a substitute for legal advice. You should neither act, nor refrain from acting, based on information contained in this site; nor should you consider any blogs or other content posted on www.Cocklebur.com to be a substitute for proper legal research conducted by a licensed attorney. Visitors to this site should consult a licensed attorney before relying on any information found on this site.
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, Cockle Law informs you that any U.S. federal tax advice or information contained in this site (including any blog post or on any site linked to or from www.Cocklebur.com) is not intended or written to be used, and can not be used, for the purpose of (I) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (II) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
Monthly Archives: March 2012
The Legal Writing Pro Dissects the Solicitor General’s Brief in the Affordable Care Act Case
The Legal Writing Pro, Ross Guberman, sent me this great PDF (you can find it here), where he dissects the Solicitor General’s merits brief in the Affordable Care Act case. For those of you who do not know Ross, he is a legal writing master who instructs law school students, lawyers, and judges on how to [...]
Posted in Briefs ( Leave a comment)
Is Marbury v. Madison the Key to the Affordable Care Act?
A few days ago, I wrote on Slate how Marbury v. Madison might be the key to the Affordable Care Act. You can read it here.
Posted in Supreme Court ( Leave a comment)
New Merits Brief Filed by Cockle Printing
Brief for Respondent David Patchak in the vided cases of Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak, No. 11-246, and Salazar v. Patchak, No. 11-247, filed on March 20, 2012.
Posted in Uncategorized ( Leave a comment)
Previewing the Obamacare cases
In the run-up to the oral arguments in the Obamacare cases, I have a series of posts over at PLF Liberty Blog explaining the issues involved. The first installments are listed below; the rest are coming between now and the arguments, which begin a week from today. What to look for in the Obamacare arguments [...]
Posted in Uncategorized ( Comments closed)
New Merits Briefs Filed by Cockle Printing
Reply Brief for Petitioner in Miller v. Alabama, No. 10-9646, filed on March 12, 2012. Reply Brief for Petitioner in Jackson v. Hobbs, No. 10-9647, filed on March 12, 2012. Reply Brief for the Petitioner in Vasquez v. U.S., No. 11-199, filed on March 12, 2012. Reply Brief for Petitioners in Reichle v. Howards, No. [...]
Posted in Uncategorized ( Leave a comment)
Supreme Court Takes A Close Look At Prisoner Transsexual Case
Last week, the Supreme Court relisted a case involving some transsexual prisoners’ claims that the State of Wisconsin violated their right to adequate medical care by failing to provide them with hormonal therapy. The case is Smith v. Fields, No. 11-561. Both the Federal District Court and Seventh Circuit found in favor of the prisoners, concluding that the [...]
Posted in Prisoners, Supreme Court ( Leave a comment)
New Merits Brief Filed by Cockle Printing
Brief for Respondent in RadLAX Gateway Hotel v. Amalgamated Bank, No. 11-166, filed on March 2, 2012.
Posted in Uncategorized ( Leave a comment)
The Seventh Circuit Rules that Pro Se Prisoner Missed His Chance at Resentencing
I wrote this past year about the obstacles that prisoners filing pro se face when challenging their convictions and sentences. The Seventh Circuit’s opinion today in United States v. Wyatt kind of typifies the problems inherent in a system that requires uneducated prisoners to fend for themselves and learn the law within a year in order to meet [...]
Posted in Criminal Law, Prisoners ( 1 Comment)
New Merits Briefs Filed by Cockle Printing