Podcast appearances and mentions of Antonio V Hotels

On June 1, 2021 the Supreme Court decided City of San Antonio, Texas v. Hotels.com L.P. The issue was whether, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit alone has held, district courts “lack[] discretion to deny or reduce” appellate costs deemed “taxable” in district court under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39(e).In a 9-0 opinion authored by Justice Alito, the Court affirmed the ruling of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Supreme Court held, “Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39 does not permit a district court to alter a court of appeals’ allocation of the costs listed in subdivision (e) of that rule.”Charles Campbell, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Associate Professor of Law at Faulkner University’s Jones School of Law, joins us today to discuss this decision and its implications.

Support the show (https://paypal.me/SCOTUSsyllabus)

On April 21, 2021 the Supreme Court heard oral argument in City of San Antonio v. Hotels.com. The question before the Court was whether, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit alone has held, district courts “lack[] discretion to deny or reduce” appellate costs deemed “taxable” in district court under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39(e).Charles Campbell, Associate Professor of Law and Interim Dean at Faulkner University's Jones School of Law, joins us today to discuss this case's oral argument.

QUESTION PRESENTED:Whether, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit alone has held, district courts “lack[] discretion to deny or reduce” appellate costs deemed “taxable” in district court under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39(e).DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)Sep 10 2020 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 14, 2020)Sep 28 2020 | Waiver of right of respondents Site59.com L.L.C. and Travelocity.com L.P. (n/k/a TVL LP) to respond filed.Sep 28 2020 | Waiver of right of respondents Travelweb, LLC, et al. to respond filed.Sep 29 2020 | Waiver of right of respondents Expedia, Inc., et al. to respond filed.Oct 21 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/6/2020.Nov 02 2020 | Response Requested. (Due December 2, 2020)Dec 02 2020 | Brief of respondents Hotels.com L.P., et al. in opposition filed.Dec 16 2020 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.Dec 16 2020 | Reply of petitioner City of San Antonio, Texas, on behalf of itself and all other similarly situated Texas municipalities filed. (Distributed)Jan 08 2021 | Petition GRANTED.Feb 18 2021 | Motion for an extension of time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits filed.Feb 18 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is granted and the time is extended to and including February 24, 2021.Feb 24 2021 | Brief of petitioner City of San Antonio, Texas, on behalf of itself and all other similarly situated Texas municipalities filed.Feb 24 2021 | Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)Mar 03 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.Mar 03 2021 | Brief amici curiae of National Association of Counties, National League of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, International City/County Management Association, and International Municipal Lawyers Association filed.Mar 12 2021 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, April 21, 2021.Mar 15 2021 | Record requested.Mar 15 2021 | The record from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit is electronic and located on Pacer.Mar 26 2021 | Brief of respondents Expedia, Inc., Hotels.com, L.P., Hotwire, Inc., Orbitz, LLC, Trip Network, Inc., Internetwork Publishing Corp., Travelnow.com, Inc. filed. (Distributed)Mar 29 2021 | Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.Mar 30 2021 | CIRCULATEDApr 05 2021 | Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument DENIED.Apr 09 2021 | Reply of petitioner City of San Antonio, Texas, on behalf of itself and all other similarly situated Texas municipalities filed. (Distributed)Apr 21 2021 | Argued. For petitioner: Daniel L. Geyser, Dallas, Tex. For respondents: David B. Salmons, Washington, D. C.★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

San Antonio v. Hotels.com, L.P. | 04/21/21 | Docket #: 20-334

A case in which the Court will decide whether district courts have the discretion to deny or reduce appellate costs deemed “taxable” in district court under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39(e).

San Antonio v. Hotels.com, L.P.

A case in which the Court held that district courts do not have the discretion to deny or reduce appellate costs deemed “taxable” in district court under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39(e).