Tenth Circuit· 3/25/2014

Planned Parenthood KS & Mid-MO v. Brownback

Citations

747 F.3d 814

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

stating that sua sponte review was appropriate because the issue was antecedent to an issue raised by the parties, the party being affected had two opportunities to brief the subject, and the issue was substantial and important
addressing an issue sua sponte when the plaintiff had raised the issue in the opening brief but had not pressed the point in further briefing, reasoning that the issue was crucial and the defendant had had opportunities to respond
abrogated in part on other grounds by Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, Inc., — U.S.—, 135 S.Ct. 1378, 191 L.Ed.2d 471 (2015)
“[W]hen state or local law conflicts with federal law, federal law prevails.”
Waiver “binds only the party, not the court. . . . [I]t is well-settled that courts have discretion to raise and decide issues sua sponte, even for the purpose of reversing a lower-court judgment.”
“Waiver . . . binds only the party, not the court. . . . [I]t is well-settled that courts have discretion to raise and decide issues sua sponte, even for the purpose of reversing a lower-court judgment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lucero, Hartz, O'Brien

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

30 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

125 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.