SharonsSlideShare

SharonsFacebook

www.facebook.com

Sharon's Favorites

Loading...

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Click here: Magner v. Gallagher : SCOTUSblog#.TymrZmp8V6J.blogger


http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/magner-v-gallagher/#.TymrZmp8V6J.blogger



Magner v. Gallagher

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term

10-1032 8th Cir. Feb 29, 2012

TBD TBD TBD OT 2011



Disclaimer: Goldstein & Russell, P.C. serves as counsel to the respondents in this case.



Issue: (1) Whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act; and, if so (2) what test should be used to analyze them.



Plain English Issue: (1) Whether a lawsuit can be brought for a violation of the Fair Housing Act based on a practice that is not discriminatory on its own, but has a discriminatory effect; and, if so, (2) how should courts determine whether a practice has a discriminatory effect and violates the Act?



SCOTUSblog Coverage

Petition of the day

Briefs and Documents

Merits Briefs for the Petitioners

Brief for Steve Magner et al.

Amicus Briefs in Support of the Petitioners

Brief of the International Municipal Lawyers Association et al.

Brief of the Township of Mount Holly, New Jersey

Brief of the Pacific Legal Foundation et al.

Brief of the Independent Community Bankers of America et al.

Brief of the Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, Inc.

Brief of the American Bankers Association et al.

Amicus Briefs in Support of Neither Party

Brief of the United States

Merits Briefs for the Respondents

Brief of Thomas Gallagher et al.

Amicus Briefs in Support of the Respondents

Brief of the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund

Brief of the Lawyer's Committee on Civil Rights et al.

Brief of the Housing Advocates, Inc., and Buckeye Community Hope Foundation

Brief of the National Fair Housing Alliance et al.

Brief of the Opportunity Agenda et al.

Brief of the ACLU

Brief of Massachusetts et al.

Brief of Henry G. Cisneros

Brief of AARP and Mount Holly Gardens Citizens In Action



Certiorari-stage documents

Opinion below (8th Cir.)

Petition for certiorari

Brief in opposition of respondents Thomas J. Gallagher et al.

Petitioners' reply





LEGAL NOTICE: /s/S,haron4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835: Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Candidate AG2010 www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com Blogger: www.facebook.com/sharon4anderson www.twitter.com/sharon4anderson Homestead Act of 1862 neopopulism.org - Pro Se Dec Action Litigation Pack Sharon4Anders on
Scribd Document's are based on SEC filings, Blogger: Dashboard Home
www.slideshare.com/sharonanderson www.taxthemax.blogspot.com www.sharon4anderson.org FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are makinknowledge gained as financial journalists , securities they recommend to readers, affiliated entities, employeesand agents an initial trade recommendation published on the Internet, after a direct mail publication is sent, before acting on that recommendations, and may contain errors. Investment decisions should not be based solely on these or other Public Office documents expressly forbids its writers from having financial interests in g such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of whistleblower protection issues, MY FindLaw SharonsWritProA06_1150_30Jun06_26 The CAN-SPAM Act: Requirements for Commercial Emailers Sharons-Psychic-Whispers: Sharons Gypsy Curse-Court-Cop Corruption 3Apr0http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPlawsuit/courtfilings/Docket.htm Sharon4Council: DLJ Management v. City St. Paul A06-2118,Money LaunderinNo direct un-apportioned tax confirmed by the US Supreme Court rulings in CHAS. C. STEWARD MACH. CO. v. DAVIS, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582(1937) g andFCC Complaints - http://sharons-copywrite.blogspot.com

Sharon4Judge