Supreme Court of the United States
Skip Navigation LinksHome > Search Results



Docket for 03-1234
No. 03-1234
Vide 03-1230
Title:
Mid-Con Freight Systems, Inc., et al., Petitioners
v.
Michigan Public Service Commission, et al.
Docketed:March 2, 2004
Lower Ct:Court of Appeals of Michigan
  Case Nos.:(226052, 226122, 226053, 226137)
  Decision Date:March 11, 2003
Discretionary Court  
  Decision Date:December 3, 2003
Questions Presented

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings  and  Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feb 26 2004 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 1, 2004)
Mar 18 2004 Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 3, 2004.
May 3 2004 Brief of respondents Michigan Public Service Commission, et al. in opposition filed.
May 14 2004 Reply of petitioners Mid-Con Freight Systems, Inc., et al. filed.
May 18 2004 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 3, 2004.
Jun 7 2004 The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.
Dec 17 2004 Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. VIDED.
Dec 29 2004 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 14, 2005.
Jan 5 2005 Supplemental brief of respondents Michigan Public Service Commission, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 5 2005 Supplemental brief of petitioners Mid-Con Freight Systems, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
Jan 14 2005 Petition GRANTED limited to the following question: Whether the $100 fee upon vehicles operating solely in interstate commerce is preempted by 49 U.S.C. 14504.
Jan 21 2005 The orders granting the petitions for writs of certiorari are amended to read as follows: The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted limited to the following questions: 1) �Whether the $100 fee upon vehicles conducting intrastate operations violates the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.� 2) �Whether the $100 fee upon vehicles operating solely in interstate commerce is preempted by 49 U.S.C. �14504.� The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. (See 03-1230)
Feb 1 2005 Motion to deconsolidate the cases or, in the alternative, enlargement of time for oral argument and for divided argument filed by petitioners. VIDED.
Feb 7 2005 Response to petitioners' motion to deconsolidate the cases. VIDED.
Feb 21 2005 Joint appendix filed. VIDED.
Feb 22 2005 SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, April 26, 2005.
Feb 25 2005 Brief of petitioners Mid-Con Freight Systems, Inc., et al. filed. VIDED.
Feb 28 2005 Brief amicus curiae of United States in support of petitioners filed.
Mar 9 2005 Letter filed by petitioners' to supplement their motion for divided argument (VIDED).
Mar 15 2005 Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. VIDED.
Mar 16 2005 Joint response by petitioners to the motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument. VIDED
Mar 16 2005 Record received from Court of Appeals of Michigan. (1 box)
Mar 25 2005 CIRCULATED.
Apr 4 2005 The motion to deconsolidate the cases or in the alternative to enlarge the time is Denied. The motion for divided argument is Granted to be divided as follows: 15 minutes for petitioners in 03-1230; 10 minutes for petitioners in 03-1234; 25 minutes for respondents; and 10 minutes for United States. VIDED.
Apr 4 2005 Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. VIDED.
Apr 4 2005 Brief of respondents Michigan Public Service Commission, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Apr 18 2005 Record received from Circuit Court of Michigan. ( 2 boxes)
Apr 19 2005 Reply of petitioners Mid-Con Freight Systems, Inc., et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Apr 20 2005 Record received from Supreme Court of Michigan. (1 envelope)
Apr 26 2005 Argued. For petitioners in 03-1230: Robert Digges, J., Alexandria, VA. For petitioners in 03-1234: James H. Hanson, Indianapolis, Ind. For respondents: Henry J. Boynton, Assistant Solicitor General, Lansing, Mich.; and Malcolm L. Stewart, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)
Jun 20 2005 Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Breyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, Scalia, Souter, Thomas, and Ginsburg, JJ., joined. Kenendy, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and O'Connor, J., joined.
Jul 22 2005 MANDATE ISSUED.
Jul 26 2005 Record returned to Court of Appeals of Michigan.
Jul 26 2005 Record returned to Circuit Court of Michigan.
Jul 26 2005 Record returned to Supreme Court of Michigan.
Aug 8 2005 Acknowledgement of receipt (07/26/05) of judgment from Clerk, Court of Appeals of Michigan received.



~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioners:
James H. Hanson Scopelitits, Garvin, Light & Hanson, P.C.(317) 637-1777
    Counsel of Record10 W. Market Street
Suite 1500
Indianapolis, IN  46204
Party name: Mid-Con Freight Systems, Inc., et al.
Attorneys for Respondents:
Thomas L. Casey Solicitor General(517) 373-1124
    Counsel of Record Office of the Attorney General
P.O. Box 30212
Lansing, MI  48909
Party name: Michigan Public Service Commission, et al.
Other:
Paul D. Clement Acting Solicitor General(202) 514-2217
Department of Justice
Washington, DC  20530
Party name: United States
 
Malcolm L. Stewart Deputy Solicitor General(202) 514-2201
Department of Justice
Washington, DC  20530
malcolm.l.stewart@usjoj.gov
Party name: Mid-Con Freight Systems, Inc., et al. v. Michigan Public Service Commission, et al.

 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 1 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20543