New Jersey v. Nevada
Headline: Court appoints a special master to manage filings, gather evidence, and summon witnesses, with parties billed for the master’s costs and the Chief Justice authorized to replace the master during recess.
Holding: The Court ordered Wade H. McCree, Jr. appointed as special master with authority to manage filings, summon witnesses, take evidence, report to the Court, and have his expenses charged to the parties as directed.
- Places a neutral official in charge of evidence gathering and case management.
- Makes parties responsible for the special master’s fees and related costs.
- Allows the Chief Justice to appoint a replacement during Court recesses.
Summary
Background
The Court appointed the Honorable Wade H. McCree, Jr., of Ann Arbor, Michigan, as a special master in an ongoing case. The order gives him power to set deadlines, require additional filings, and handle follow-up proceedings. The City of Las Vegas asked to be dismissed as a defendant, and that request has been sent to the special master for consideration.
Reasoning
The Court gave the special master broad, practical authority. He may fix times and conditions for filing new papers, direct how the case should proceed, summon witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take any evidence he thinks necessary. He may also submit reports to the Court. The order says the master will be paid his actual expenses, and that his fees, the cost of his assistants, and the cost of printing reports and other proper expenses will be charged to the parties in proportions the Court will later decide. If the special master’s post becomes vacant while the Court is not in session, the Chief Justice may name a new master who will have the same authority as the original appointment.
Real world impact
Practically, a neutral official will handle much of the case’s fact-finding and procedural work, which can speed evidence gathering and organize filings. Lawyers, witnesses, and the parties can expect subpoenas and formal evidence collection directed by the master. The order is a procedural step, not a final ruling on the case’s merits, and the allocation of costs among the parties will be decided later by the Court.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?