Posted by Orin Kerr:
Interesting Question Inspired by Pearson v. Callahan:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_01_18-2009_01_24.shtml#1232577220
Imagine a circuit court publishes a decision holding A and B, where
both holdings A and B are considered necessary to the court's outcome.
The Supreme Court grants cert,, reverses judgment on the ground that B
was wrong, and announces a new methodology by which the circuit court
did not have to reach A to reach the issue in B.
Here's the question: Is the circuit court holding A still binding
law in the circuit? And is it a question of circuit court internal
operating procedures, or Supreme Court law, or a combination of both?
I get the feeling that I should know this, but off the top of my head
I don't (and it's one of those research questions that's relatively
hard to query in Westlaw). I'm figuring that some of our top-shelf VC
readers must know. . . .
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
