Legal Opinion
In re: Hillary Clinton
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided August 14, 2020No. 20-5056PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued June 2, 2020 Decided August 14, 2020 No. 20-5056 IN RE: HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON AND CHERYL MILLS, PETITIONERS On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (No. 1:14-cv-01242) David E. Kendall argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the petition for writ of mandamus and the reply were Katherine M. Turner, Stephen L. Wohlgemuth, Suraj Kumar, and Beth A. Wilkinson. Ramona R. Cotca argued the cause for respondent Judicial Watch, Inc. With her on the response to the petition for writ of mandamus were Lauren M. Burke and Paul J.…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Safecard Services, Inc. v. Securities and Exchange CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1991
- Church of Scientology of California v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Cheney v. United States District Court for District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Cobbledick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Watkins Law & Advocacy, PLLC v. DOJCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2023
- Pavement Coatings Technology v. United States Geological SurveyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2021
- America First Legal Foundation v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2024
- Ball v. United States Marshal ServiceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2021
- Cato Institute v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2022
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.