*1 Appeals’ judgment, In the Court of this Court expressed only judicial no of the merits. The view decision addressing propriety the the Commission’sactions under § preamendment is version that of the Appeals, in which resolved the favor. issue judgment way suggests This in no that triumphed prior would have simply scheme; it petitioners’ energies shifting reflects success in their judicial legislative from the arena. Petitioners, Appeals, persuaded short, lost the Court of this Court to review that court’s decision at substantial cost to all the parties, obtaining and, an after amendment of the relevant provision, sought unsuccessfully have to this Court order the Court of to vacate its as moot. respondents, Ap- Yet who were victorious the Court of peals, suggested disposition adopted by and following legislation, this case the enactment new now petitioners’ pay costs. unnecessary Because this result is under the Court’s Rules patently and unfair under the circumstances of this grant respondents’ dissent. I would and allow no party. costs to either Sony Corporation
No. 81-1687. of America et al. v. City Studios, 9th Cir. Universal Inc., granted, [Certiorari 457 U. S. 1116]; Hospital No. 81-2101. Pennhurst State School and [Certiorari et al. v. granted, A. 3d Cir. et Halderman al. 1131.] 457 U. S. Cases restored to for calendar reargument. Firefighters Boston Union, Local
v. Boston Chapter, NAACP, al.; et Boston Police Assn., Patrolmen’s Inc. et Castro al.; Beecher Chapter, Boston NAACP, al., 461 U. 477. S. to part retax costs denied. took no Justice Marshall consideration or decision of this motion.
Justice Blackmun, dissenting. city lay
In 1981, the of Boston decided to off hundreds of firefighters police By officers. statute, Massachusetts requires layoffs that civil service occur the order of reverse (West 1979). seniority. §39 Mass. Ann., 31, Gen. Laws ch. Many minority members of Boston’s Police and Fire De- partments only recently pursuant had been hired to consent by agreed proportion decrees which Boston to increase the Departments remedy of minorities in order to its past discriminatory hiring practices. layoffs As a result, policy last-hired, first-fired would have significantly minority representation reduced in the two Departments.
Respondents obtained an order from the United States enjoining District for the District of Massachusetts laying personnel pursuant Boston from off policy layoffs per- to the extent that such would reduce the centage minority police firefighters officers and below the layoffs began. level obtained before the The United States Court of for the First Circuit affirmed. 679 F. 2d (1982). Appeals’ 965 After the decision, Court of Massa- legislation providing chusetts enacted Boston with new reve- requiring police nues, fighters it to reinstate all officers and fire- during city’s securing off
laid fiscal crisis, persons against layoffs those future for fiscal reasons. 1982 §25. Mass. ch. Acts, 190, important
This Court certiorari to consider this (1982). issue. 459 affirmative-action U. S. 967 After hear- argument, ing oral however, the Court vacated the light and remanded for consideration of mootness in of the (1983). legislation. new Massachusetts U. S. Costs against respondents were assessed under this Court’s Rule provides: 50.2, which “In a case of reversal or by any judgment Court, costs shall be this or decree appellant petitioner, ordered unless otherwise or allowed to Respondents have moved to retax costs. the Court.” Regulatory Comm’n Nuclear as United States Here, dissenting p. Sholly, denial J., from ante, (Blackmun, denying respondents’ motion), I errs believe petition- disposition of this which The motion. actively opposed, none of the relief accorded ers propriety, way questioned they sought, at the and in no judgment. Appeals’ rendered, of the Court time it was why simply understand I do not circumstances, Under these Sholly, pay petitioners’ costs. As grant no costs to either and allow would party. *3 No. 81-2149. Dakota State Solem, Warden, South re- A. 8th Penitentiary C. Cir. Stumes. granted. proceed pauperis spondent for leave to forma presented Question limited to Certiorari petition. City Civil Service Commission 2d Assn. C. et al. v. Guardians
New York Certiorari denied. Cir. App. Cal., Ct.
No. 81-1332. Roberts v. California. App. denied. 4th Dist. Certiorari al. C. A. United v. Duncan States denied. Fed. Cir. Certiorari Apache Tribe White Mountain A. D. Cir. Attorney General,
Smith, denied. Certiorari