Supreme Court in first even spilt since death of Scalia

[Disir]

The case of Hawkins v. Community Bank of Raymore is not in itself major of importance, but provides a taster of just how complex deadlocked issues could be moving forward.

As is customary, the justices did not reveal who was on which side of the case or give any reasoning for their decisions. The even split means that no nationwide precedent has been set and the Supreme Court leaves the ruling of the lower court intact.

The case itself revolved around whether spouses can be held as guarantors for bank loans. In 2008, the community Bank of Raymore in Missouri approved loans to a local company on the condition that the wives of the company’s owners also signed the guarantee. But after the company defaulted on the loans in 2012, the bank demanded payment from the two women in addition to the business. They then sued, claiming the bank discriminated against them simply because they were married to the men seeking the loans and that the bank had violated the US Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
Supreme Court in first even spilt since death of Scalia

Nu-huh. It's equal opportunity to screw you.

 

[Iceweasel]

Legally spouses are joint custodians of assets or debts. That's one of the aspects of a marriage, a legal bond. So it sounds like they wanted all the benefits of marriage and none of the responsibilities. I'd bet money that the 4 for them are the progressives. Who need to be thrown off the bench for being social warriors instead of judges. It's a good example of why only a real judge like Scalia can be considered.

 

[Disir]

Legally spouses are joint custodians of assets or debts. That's one of the aspects of a marriage, a legal bond. So it sounds like they wanted all the benefits of marriage and none of the responsibilities. I'd bet money that the 4 for them are the progressives. Who need to be thrown off the bench for being social warriors instead of judges. It's a good example of why only a real judge like Scalia can be considered.

Check out the Petition for Writ of Certiorari.
http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-co...tition-for-Writ-of-Certfinal-from-printer.pdf

 

[Agit8r]

What was the lower court's ruling?

 

[Disir]

FindLaw's United States Eighth Circuit case and opinions.

You can read all other available documents here:
Hawkins v. Community Bank of Raymore

 

[jon_berzerk]

The case of Hawkins v. Community Bank of Raymore is not in itself major of importance, but provides a taster of just how complex deadlocked issues could be moving forward.

As is customary, the justices did not reveal who was on which side of the case or give any reasoning for their decisions. The even split means that no nationwide precedent has been set and the Supreme Court leaves the ruling of the lower court intact.

The case itself revolved around whether spouses can be held as guarantors for bank loans. In 2008, the community Bank of Raymore in Missouri approved loans to a local company on the condition that the wives of the company’s owners also signed the guarantee. But after the company defaulted on the loans in 2012, the bank demanded payment from the two women in addition to the business. They then sued, claiming the bank discriminated against them simply because they were married to the men seeking the loans and that the bank had violated the US Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
Supreme Court in first even spilt since death of Scalia

Nu-huh. It's equal opportunity to screw you.

Not always all 8 sided in favor of the 2nd amendment

On a stun gun issue

 

[Uncensored2008]

The case of Hawkins v. Community Bank of Raymore is not in itself major of importance, but provides a taster of just how complex deadlocked issues could be moving forward.

As is customary, the justices did not reveal who was on which side of the case or give any reasoning for their decisions. The even split means that no nationwide precedent has been set and the Supreme Court leaves the ruling of the lower court intact.

The case itself revolved around whether spouses can be held as guarantors for bank loans. In 2008, the community Bank of Raymore in Missouri approved loans to a local company on the condition that the wives of the company’s owners also signed the guarantee. But after the company defaulted on the loans in 2012, the bank demanded payment from the two women in addition to the business. They then sued, claiming the bank discriminated against them simply because they were married to the men seeking the loans and that the bank had violated the US Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
Supreme Court in first even spilt since death of Scalia

Nu-huh. It's equal opportunity to screw you.

Um, LLC anyone?