Garcia V. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (1983)

DIG (dismiss cert as improvidently granted); want to reach merits instead of DIG; would not DIG; affirm; reverse; remand; vacate; moot; court lacks jurisdiction; conference vote; withhold vote for now; defer vote; adhere to conference vote; initial vote in case; change conference vote; memo asking how others' vote on disposition

A memo where a justice states that he or she will circulate a dissenting opinion draft, including that a dissenting opinion will be out soon or that a revised draft of the dissenting opinion will be circulated; this also applies to statements responding to dissent assignments like will be glad to write dissent, self-assignment of dissent (e.g., we are in dissent and I will write it), or requesting permission to write dissent (e.g., is it ok if I write a dissent)

This refers to a majority opinion draft

Memos where a justice joins the majority opinion includes please join me; I agree; I am still with you; I acquiesce; I will go along; I dissent but will be silent; graveyard join or dissent. This code includes join of memorandum opinions if it is written by the assigned author, orders if it disposes of case, decrees, per curiam opinions. It also includes statements that the justice joins, but subject to what others might write.

Includes statement that case will not be argued

Includes statement that maybe case should be reargued

Includes statement that maybe case should be reargued

DIG (dismiss cert as improvidently granted); want to reach merits instead of DIG; would not DIG; affirm; reverse; remand; vacate; moot; court lacks jurisdiction; conference vote; withhold vote for now; defer vote; adhere to conference vote; initial vote in case; change conference vote; memo asking how others' vote on disposition

This excludes memos that assign the opinion (see Code 606), but includes memos where a justice expresses the view that a case should be reassigned or a response to a majority opinion assignment; justice may request that majority opinion not be assigned to that justice; a justice may question why the opinion was not assigned; a justice (perhaps the Chief Justice) may tell a justice to assign the opinion; a memo may discuss not assigning the opinion to any justice

Includes statement that maybe case should be reargued

This includes a cover memo to memorandum opinion if written by the assigned author; cover memo to changes to majority opinion

Includes statement that maybe case should be reargued

Memos where a justice joins the majority opinion includes please join me; I agree; I am still with you; I acquiesce; I will go along; I dissent but will be silent; graveyard join or dissent. This code includes join of memorandum opinions if it is written by the assigned author, orders if it disposes of case, decrees, per curiam opinions. It also includes statements that the justice joins, but subject to what others might write.

This includes memo with broad statements including that a justice cannot join the opinion, cannot join a part of the opinion, does not agree with the opinion, or has continuing doubts with the opinion; memos that indicate that the author's change is not enough; memos that make suggestions for specific changes to majority opinion or that express reservations about some aspect of the majority opinion; this code is also given for suggestions to memorandum opinions by an assigned author

Memos where a justice joins the majority opinion includes please join me; I agree; I am still with you; I acquiesce; I will go along; I dissent but will be silent; graveyard join or dissent. This code includes join of memorandum opinions if it is written by the assigned author, orders if it disposes of case, decrees, per curiam opinions. It also includes statements that the justice joins, but subject to what others might write.

Includes statement that maybe case should be reargued

Includes statement that case will not be argued

May be response to a suggestion, reservation, or a separate opinion; may also say that author will respond to another opinion; may state majority opinion author's change to opinion that was not prompted by another justice; may indicate that the opinion is different from the conference discussion; may be a circulation of a portion of the opinion (a footnote, multiple pages without circulating the whole opinion); may be a suggestion from the majority opinion author regarding several options for changing majority opinion; may be a suggestion from the author for a change that could be made to opinion

Justice may express views on need for additional briefs (e.g., no need for supplemental briefs); justices may discuss proposed questions for supplemental briefs; justices may discuss oral arguments, reargument, or parties' briefs (e.g., date, length, exact questions that should be presented at orals or in briefs); justices may discuss asking litigants for additional information

Memo may suggest that the justice talk or discuss an issue at conference; memo may maintain that no further conference discussion is needed; memo may state that a justice will be away

Includes statement that case will not be argued

This refers to a majority opinion draft

Justice sends memo to majority opinion author that states that the conditions under which the justice can or will not join the majority opinion; this includes memos with language like will join if..., will join the majority opinion if author makes changes suggested by another justice, or will join part of majority opinion if...; these memos may also state that a justice cannot join majority opinion if..., or could not join an opinion with a particular point, will withdraw join if...

Includes statement that case will not be argued

Justice states that he or she is undecided, including phrases like not ready to commit, need more time, not at rest, or to consider further

Justice may express views on need for additional briefs (e.g., no need for supplemental briefs); justices may discuss proposed questions for supplemental briefs; justices may discuss oral arguments, reargument, or parties' briefs (e.g., date, length, exact questions that should be presented at orals or in briefs); justices may discuss asking litigants for additional information

Justice may express views on need for additional briefs (e.g., no need for supplemental briefs); justices may discuss proposed questions for supplemental briefs; justices may discuss oral arguments, reargument, or parties' briefs (e.g., date, length, exact questions that should be presented at orals or in briefs); justices may discuss asking litigants for additional information

Justice may express views on need for additional briefs (e.g., no need for supplemental briefs); justices may discuss proposed questions for supplemental briefs; justices may discuss oral arguments, reargument, or parties' briefs (e.g., date, length, exact questions that should be presented at orals or in briefs); justices may discuss asking litigants for additional information

Justice may express views on need for additional briefs (e.g., no need for supplemental briefs); justices may discuss proposed questions for supplemental briefs; justices may discuss oral arguments, reargument, or parties' briefs (e.g., date, length, exact questions that should be presented at orals or in briefs); justices may discuss asking litigants for additional information

Includes statement that maybe case should be reargued