2013 United States Supreme Court case
| Maracich v. Spears | |
|---|---|
 Supreme Court of the United States | |
| Decided June 17, 2013 | |
| Full case name | Maracich v. Spears |
| Docket no. | 12-25 |
| Citations | 570 U.S. ___ (more) |
| Holding | |
| An attorney's solicitation of clients is not a permissible purpose covered by the "litigation exception" to the federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy |
| Dissent | Ginsburg, joined by Scalia, Sotomayor, Kagan |
| Laws applied | |
| Driver's Privacy Protection Act | |
Maracich v. Spears, 570 U.S. ___ (2013), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an attorney's solicitation of clients is not a permissible purpose covered by the "litigation exception" to the federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act.
References
- Maracich v. Spears, No. 12-25, 570 U.S. ___ (2013)
- "Opinion analysis: Turns out, turnabout is fair play". SCOTUSblog. June 17, 2013. Retrieved October 26, 2024.
External links
This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the text is in the public domain. "he Court is unanimously of opinion that no reporter has or can have any copyright in the written opinions delivered by this Court." Wheaton v. Peters, 33 U.S. (8 Pet.) 591, 668 (1834)
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it. |