Krupski v. Costa Crociere S. p. A.
560 U.S. ___ (2010)

Annotate this Case

560 U. S. ____ (2010)
560 U. S. ____ (2010)
560 U. S. ____ (2010)
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
NO. 09-337

WANDA KRUPSKI, PETITIONER v. COSTA CROCIERE S. p. A.

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit

[June 7, 2010]

   Justice Scalia, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

   I join the Court’s opinion except for its reliance, ante, at 10–11, 15, n. 5, on the Notes of the Advisory Committee as establishing the meaning of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c)(1)(C). The Advisory Committee’s insights into the proper interpretation of a Rule’s text are useful to the same extent as any scholarly commentary. But the Committee’s intentions have no effect on the Rule’s meaning. Even assuming that we and the Congress that allowed the Rule to take effect read and agreed with those intentions, it is the text of the Rule that controls. Tome v. United States, 513 U. S. 150, 167–168 (1995) (Scalia, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment).

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.