No. 21-70
Gary E. Albright, et al. v. United States
Tags: certification constitutional-federalism erie-doctrine fifth-amendment railroad-deed state-law state-law-interpretation takings-claim takings-clause
Key Terms:
Arbitration Takings FifthAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
Arbitration Takings FifthAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does constitutional federalism require certification of state law issue?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED Does constitutional federalism require a federal court that confronts an and unresolved State law issue that is particularly within the expertise of a State court—here, whether railroad deeds created an easement or fee simple title, a question antecedent to Petitioners’ Fifth Amendment takings claim—to certify the question of State law to the State’s highest court rather than making an Erieguess about how the State’s highest court would decide the issue? Under what standards may a federal court make an Erie-guess about how the State’s highest court would decide an issue?
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-08-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-08-18
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-08-17
Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute, et al. filed.
2021-07-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 18, 2021)
Attorneys
Cato Institute, et al.
Mark Fernlund Hearne II — True North Law, LLC, Amicus
Mark Fernlund Hearne II — True North Law, LLC, Amicus
Gary E. Albright, et al.
James Harold Hulme — Arent Fox LLP, Petitioner
James Harold Hulme — Arent Fox LLP, Petitioner
United States
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent