Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
AI Subscribe Login/Register account icon
S&P 500
7,064.01
(
-0.63%
)
US TECH 100
25,773.20
(
0.00%
)
Dow Jones
49,149.38
(
-0.60%
)
Brent Oil
94.21
(
-0.85%
)
Bitcoin
78,134.00
(
2.37%
)
News Focus
News Focus
Post# of 866944
Next 10
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

Steelhead9

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 5
Posts 617
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/04/2017

Steelhead9

Re: obiterdictum post# 587111

Monday, 01/13/2020 2:13:08 PM

Monday, January 13, 2020 2:13:08 PM

Post# of 866944
Okay, You were very thorough in correcting my Norm Crosby-like attempts to word my basically correct understanding that 2 opposing parties were requesting cert for differing reasons, and I am appropriately chastened if that was at all part of your intent, but you stopped short of answering my question. Is there any precedent for, is it typical for SCOTUS to grant cert for one part of a case, but not the other?
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Detailed Quote
Recent FNMA News
More FNMA News