Question re: Precedential Value of Supreme Court Answers to Certified Questions

[Vladeck, Steve]

Is anyone aware of what precedential value should be accorded to the
Supreme Court's answer to certified questions, however infrequently the
Court actually follows such a procedure (three instances in modern
times, according to Wright & Miller)?  The specific example I'm curious
about is Iran Nat'l Airlines Corp. v. Marschalk Co., 453 U.S. 919
(1981), in which the Court, over three dissents, reversed a district
court decision that might have set up a factual distinction from Dames &
Moore, and did so in a very short memorandum decision that answered
three questions certified to it by the Second Circuit.  

 

What I'm wondering is whether answers to certified questions, as in
Marschalk, are more like affirmances w/o opinions, to which the Court
has consistently accorded less precedential force...

 

Off-list replies are fine, thanks!

 

-steve

 

 

Stephen I. Vladeck

Associate Professor

University of Miami School of Law

1311 Miller Drive

Coral Gables, FL  33146

(305) 284-5837 | svladeck at law.miami.edu

Web Page: http://www.law.miami.edu/facadmin/faculty/svladeck.html
<http://www.law.miami.edu/facadmin/faculty/svladeck.html> 

SSRN Author Page:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=362455
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=362455> 

Blogs: http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com <http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/>  |
http://www.natseclaw.com <http://www.natseclaw.com/>  

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20070320/4cd4cfe8/attachment.htm