Analysis: Griffith and St. Pierre case discussion

While Griffith and St. Pierre should have been controlling precedent, neither case was cited in the briefing to Atsbeha. And, the parties did not ask that these cases be overruled in name or theory; nor did they cite Chevron Oil to the court as the test.

Further, to the extent that the Rules of Evidence were at issue and could also apply in a civil context, Robinson would have been the controlling authority. However, it also was not cited by either party.

This reinforces the conclusion that the court did not intend to overrule binding precedent sub silentio.