No. 25-831
C. S., by Her Next Friend, Adam Stroub v. Craig McCrumb, et al.
Response RequestedResponse Waived
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)
Is post hoc speculation about emotional harm that speech could cause to other students insufficient to meet Tinker's "substantial disruption" standard?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is post hoc speculation about emotional harm that speech could cause to other students insufficient to meet Tinker's 'substantial disruption' standard?
Docket Entries
2026-03-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 4, 2026. See Rule 30.1.
2026-03-05
Motion of Craig McCrumb, et al. for an extension of time submitted.
2026-03-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 2, 2026 to May 2, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.
2026-03-03
Response Requested. (Due April 2, 2026)
2026-02-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2026.
2026-02-24
Waiver of right of respondent Craig McCrumb, et al. to respond filed.
2026-01-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 12, 2026)
2025-11-07
Application (25A524) granted by Justice Kavanaugh extending the time to file until January 9, 2026.
2025-10-27
Application (25A524) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 10, 2025 to January 9, 2026, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.
Attorneys
C.S., by her next friend, Adam Stroub
John R. Monroe — Attorney at Law, Petitioner
Craig McCrumb, et al.
Daniel Joseph LoBello Jr. — O'Neill, Wallace & Doyle, P.C., Respondent