Supreme Court Appellate Jurisdiction over Facts

Gerard Magliocca

Gerard N. Magliocca is the Samuel R. Rosen Professor at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. Professor Magliocca is the author of three books and over twenty articles on constitutional law and intellectual property. He received his undergraduate degree from Stanford, his law degree from Yale, and joined the faculty after two years as an attorney at Covington and Burling and one year as a law clerk for Judge Guido Calabresi on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Professor Magliocca has received the Best New Professor Award and the Black Cane (Most Outstanding Professor) from the student body, and in 2008 held the Fulbright-Dow Distinguished Research Chair of the Roosevelt Study Center in Middelburg, The Netherlands. He was elected to the American Law Institute (ALI) in 2013.

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. MDubs says:

    It happened in Easley v. Cromarite, 532 U.S. 234 (2001), which came to the Court from a three-judge District Court decision.

  2. A related, and interesting article about the Supreme Court and facts:

  3. Joe says:

    Is NYT v. Sullivan an example of it happening?

  4. Shag from Brookline says:

    Is there a suggestion that “both as to law and fact” permits a trial de novo with evidence presented to the Court beyond what was presented in the trial court? Or does “fact” relate to what the evidence permits under applicable law to constitute a relevant fact?