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 Volokh@lists.powerblogs.com http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh