Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a motion to intervene is timely when it is filed shortly after a would-be intervenor learns that the existing parties misrepresented that the would-be intervenor's rights would not be affected.
Whether an unrebutted statement of facts submitted in support of a motion to intervene must be accepted as true and considered by the district court.
Whether the prejudice test under FRCP Rule 24 (a) begins to run when the would-be intervenor clearly knows its interests will be affected after learning of a deception used to discourage intervention.
Whether a consent decree may affect statutory rights that are not specifically protected by a provision of the consent decree.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a motion to intervene is timely when it is filed shortly after a would-be intervenor learns that the existing parties misrepresented that the would-be intervenor's rights would not be affected
2019-09-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-08-30
Reply of petitioner Fraternal Order of Police Chicago Lodge No. 7 filed.
2019-08-16
Brief of respondent State of Illinois in opposition filed.
2019-06-13
Brief amicus curiae of National Fraternal Order of Police filed.
2019-06-13
Certificate of Compliance filed with respect to amicus curiae brief of The National Fraternal Order of Police.
2019-06-13
Affidavit of Service filed with respect to amicus curiae brief of The National Fraternal Order of Police.
2019-06-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 16, 2019.
2019-05-31
Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 17, 2019 to August 16, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-05-17
Response Requested. (Due June 17, 2019)
2019-05-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/30/2019.
2019-05-09
Waiver of right of respondent State of Illinois to respond filed.
2019-05-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 5, 2019)