The Supreme Court is continuing its slow start this term. It today announced it will hear only four cases next month. With over a third of the term’s calendars concluded or scheduled, the court is on track to issue 38 or 39 opinions, which would be an historic low. (See here.) However, the court also started last term slowly, but picked up the pace later and ended with 58 opinions.

On Wednesday, December 4, in Los Angeles, the court will hear the following cases (with the issue or issues presented as summarized by court staff or limited by the court itself):

Ranger v. Alamitos Bay Yacht Club: May a maritime worker described by 33 United States Code section 902(3)(A)-(F) within the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq.) bring an action to recover for a workplace injury under the general maritime law or does California’s workers’ compensation scheme provide the worker’s exclusive remedy? The court granted review in December 2023. More about the case here.

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board: Should the calculation of enhanced workers’ compensation benefits for an employer’s serious and willful misconduct under Labor Code section 4553 be based on temporary disability payments available under the Labor Code? The court granted review in December 2023. More about the case here.

People v. Patton: Did the trial court engage in impermissible judicial factfinding by relying on the preliminary hearing transcript to deny defendant’s Penal Code section 1172.6 petition at the prima facie stage? (See People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952.)” (See here.) The court granted review in June 2023. More about the case here.

People v. McGhee: This is an automatic direct appeal from a January 2009 judgment of death. The court’s website does not list issues for death penalty appeals.  Counsel was appointed in November 2012. Initial briefing was completed in May 2017. In December 2023, the court ordered supplemental briefing “[i]f appellant contends any changes in the law (including any ameliorative statute) since the filing of the reply brief are relevant to this appeal.” The defendant filed a supplemental brief in February 2024. The Attorney General’s response is due tomorrow, after the court granted four extensions. A reply brief is due 20 days after the Attorney General’s brief is filed.

Briefs for the cases will soon be posted here. The arguments will be live streamed. Opinions in the cases should file by March 3.