Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
US Supreme Court: 04-944

US Supreme Court: 04-944

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2|Likes:
Published by Supreme Court

More info:

Published by: Supreme Court on Jan 19, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/08/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X
JENIFER ARBAUGH,Petitioner,v.::: No. 04-944Y & H CORPORATION, DBATHE MOONLIGHT CAFE.::- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -XWashington, D.C.Wednesday, January 11, 2006The above-entitled matter came on for oralargument before the Supreme Court of the United Statesat 10:10 a.m.APPEARANCES:JEFFREY A. SCHWARTZ, ESQ., New Orleans, Louisiana; onbehalf of the Petitioner.DARYL JOSEFFER, ESQ., Assistant to the SolicitorGeneral, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.;on behalf of the United States, as amicus curiae,supporting the Petitioner.BRETT D. PRENDERGAST, ESQ., New Orleans, Louisiana; onbehalf of the Respondent.
1
1111 14th Street, NW Suite 400 Alderson Reporting Company Washington, DC 200051-800-FOR-DEPO
 
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
C O N T E N T S
ORAL ARGUMENT OF PAGEJEFFREY A. SCHWARTZ, ESQ.On behalf of the Petitioner
3DARYL JOSEFFER, ESQ.On behalf of the United States,as amicus curiae, supporting the Petitioner 18
BRETT D. PRENDERGAST, ESQ.
On behalf of the Respondent 26
REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OF
JEFFREY A. SCHWARTZ, ESQ.
On behalf of the Petitioner 52
2
1111 14th Street, NW Suite 400 Alderson Reporting Company Washington, DC 200051-800-FOR-DEPO
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
P R O C E E D I N G S(10:10 a.m.)CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: We'll hear argumentfirst today in Arbaugh v. Y & H Corporation.Mr. Joseffer.MR. SCHWARTZ: Mr. Schwartz.CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Mr. Schwartz. Excuseme. Mr. Schwartz.ORAL ARGUMENT OF JEFFREY A. SCHWARTZON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERMR. SCHWARTZ: Mr. Chief Justice, and may itplease the Court:A Federal court has subject matterjurisdiction over a claim brought under title VIIregardless of whether an employer has 15 employees.This is so because when Congress enacted title VII, itincluded a specific jurisdictional grant and that grantprovides that jurisdiction will exist in the Federalcourts over all claims brought under the act.This specific grant of jurisdiction isconsistent with the more general grant of jurisdictioncontained in 28 U.S.C. 1331 wherein Federal questionjurisdiction exists over all claims that arise under aFederal law. Title VII is a Federal law.The Fifth Circuit erred when it -- when it
3
1111 14th Street, NW Suite 400 Alderson Reporting Company Washington, DC 200051-800-FOR-DEPO

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->