No. 21-880
Vicki Stefanini v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company
Response Waived
Tags: appellate-rules court-procedure defects dismissal judicial-review legal-interpretation merits-review procedural-technicality rehearing substantial-compliance
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2022-01-21
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a technical application of appellate rules should bar a review of the merits of an appellate case, when substantial compliance with the rules is evident in the record
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a technical application of appellate rules should bar a review of the merits of an appellate case, when substantial compliance with the rules is evident in the record. 2. Whether, as a matter of law, the lower appellate court should have granted rehearing in light of the appellant having corrected any defects in her brief and because the prior defects did not warrant dismissal.
Docket Entries
2022-01-24
Petition DENIED.
2022-01-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/21/2022.
2021-12-21
Waiver of right of respondent Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company to respond filed.
2021-12-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 13, 2022)
Attorneys
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company
Mark J. Foley — Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Respondent
Mark J. Foley — Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Respondent
Vicki Stefanini
Berangere Allen-Blaine — The Appellate Law Firm, Petitioner
Berangere Allen-Blaine — The Appellate Law Firm, Petitioner