I also wrongly predicted FCC v. Nextwave. It turns out that you can bid way more than you can afford to get an FCC license, fail to make your payments, then prevent the FCC from taking the license back by declaring bankruptcy. Go figure.
Next week brings a bunch of cases, but since I am taking the Virginia bar in 9 days, the following are little more than guesses. Note these are in reverse order because I'm reading about the cases, and making my predictions based entirely on the excellent write ups by the externs at Goldstein Howe on SCOTUSblog.
Dow Chemical Co. v. Stephenson. Can you collaterally attack a settlement agreement entered into 20 years ago? I doubt it. REVERSE
Roell v. Withrow. Whether all defendants must give written consent to assignment of jurisdiction before trial, or whether post-trial consent is adequate. I vote for post-trial. REVERSE.
Clackamas Gastroenterology Assoc. v. Wells : (Insert your own joke about the petitioner's name) This case has something to do with counting employees under the ADA. The Ninth Circuit said one thing, and given that my analysis will not be very extensive, I'll play the odds and say REVERSE.
Massaro v. US. Habeas case, ineffective assistance of counsel. AFFIRM.
California Franchise Tax Board v. Hyatt. Sovereign immunity. REVERSE.
Pacific Health Care v. Book. Tough case about whether parties may contract to require arbitration of punitive damages claims under RICO. My complete guess is REVERSE.