From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

BASF Corp. v. Peterson

U.S.
May 2, 2005
544 U.S. 1012 (2005)

Summary

concluding that the court need not review an issue that could have been brought in a prior appeal, but was not, because "consideration of [the petitioner's] [newly raised] arguments . . . would undermine principles of fairness and judicial economy"

Summary of this case from Humphreys v. Krasner

Opinion

No. 04-81.

May 2, 2005.


Certiorari Granted — Vacated and Remanded.

Sup. Ct. Minn. Motions of CropLife America, Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, and Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., for leave to file briefs as amid curiae granted. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, ante, p. 431. Reported below: 675 N. W. 2d 57.


Summaries of

BASF Corp. v. Peterson

U.S.
May 2, 2005
544 U.S. 1012 (2005)

concluding that the court need not review an issue that could have been brought in a prior appeal, but was not, because "consideration of [the petitioner's] [newly raised] arguments . . . would undermine principles of fairness and judicial economy"

Summary of this case from Humphreys v. Krasner
Case details for

BASF Corp. v. Peterson

Case Details

Full title:BASF CORP. v. PETERSON ET AL

Court:U.S.

Date published: May 2, 2005

Citations

544 U.S. 1012 (2005)
125 S. Ct. 1968

Citing Cases

State v. Dahlin

The conclusion that a petition for review is required is reinforced by our analysis in Peterson v. BASF…

Peterson v. BASF Corp.

In an order filed May 2, 2005, the Court granted the writ of certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded…