The Federal Bulletin Board Online via GPO AccessThe Federal Bulletin Board Online via GPO Access
The Federal Bulletin Board (FBB) is a free electronic bulletin board service of the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO). All file library documents can be downloaded for free.
R098a.zs 07/02/98 7792 bytes (161 hits)
Monge v. California
R098-O; 6/26/98. The Double Jeopardy Clause,
which is applicable in the capital sentencing
scheme, see Bullington v. Missouri, 451 U.S.
430, does not extend to noncapital sentencing
proceedings. Syllabus.
97-6146 California O'Connor,J. Sentencing
Monge Syllabus Double-jeopardy
Noncapital-sentencing
R098aa.zd 07/02/98 9350 bytes (51 hits)
Monge v. California
R098a; 6/26/98. The Double Jeopardy Clause,
which is applicable in the capital sentencing
scheme, see Bullington v. Missouri, 451 U.S.
430, does not extend to noncapital sentencing
proceedings. Stevens,J., dissenting.
97-6146 California Stevens,J. Sentencing
Monge Dissent Double-jeopardy
Noncapital-sentencing
R098ba.zd1 07/02/98 11863 bytes (32 hits)
Monge v. California
R098b; 6/26/98. The Double Jeopardy Clause,
which is applicable in the capital sentencing
scheme, see Bullington v. Missouri 451 U.S. 430,
does not extend to noncapital sentencing
proceedings. Scalia, J., dissenting.
97-6146 Scalia,J. Sentencing Monge Dissent
Double-jeopardy Noncapital-sentencing
R098_oa.zo 07/02/98 27196 bytes (23 hits)
Monge v. California
R098-O; 6/26/98. The Double Jeopardy Clause,
which is applicable in the capital sentencing
scheme, see Bullington v. Missouri, 451 U.S.
430, does not extend to noncapital sentencing
proceedings. O'Connor,J., opinion.
97-6146 California O'Connor,J. Sentencing
Monge Opinion Double-jeopardy
Noncapital-sentencing
R099a.zs 07/02/98 14186 bytes (112 hits)
Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
R099; 6/26/98. Under Title VII, an employee
who refuses the unwelcome and threatening
sexual advances of a supervisor, yet suffers
no adverse, tangible job consequences, may
recover against the employer without showing
the employer is negligent or otherwise at fault
for the supervisor's actions, but the employer
may interpose an affirmative defense. Syllabus.
97-569 Ellerth Kennedy,J. Vicarious-liability
Burlington-Industries-Inc. Syllabus Title-VII
Sex-harassment
R099aa.zc 07/02/98 1321 bytes (60 hits)
Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
R099a; 6/26/98. Under Title VII, an employee
who refuses the unwelcome and threatening
sexual advances of a supervisor, yet suffers
no adverse, tangible job consequences, may
recover against the employer without showing
the employer is negligent or otherwise at
fault for the supervisor's actions, but the
employer may interpose an affirmative defense.
Ginsburg,J., concurring in the judgment.
97-569 Ellerth Ginsburg,J. Vicarious-liability
Burlington-industries-Inc. Concur Title-VII
Sex harassment
R099ba.zd 07/02/98 20176 bytes (34 hits)
Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
R099B; 6/26/98. Under Title VII, an employee
who refuses the unwelcome and threatening sexual
advances of a supervisor, yet suffers no
adverse, tangible job consequences, may recover
against the employer without showing the
employer is negligent or otherwise at fault
for the supervisor's actions, but the employer
may interpose an affirmative defense. Thomas,J.,
dissenting.
97-569 Ellerth Thomas,J. Vicarious-liability
Burlington-Industries-Inc. Dissent Title-VII
Sex-harassment
R099_oa.zo 07/02/98 46876 bytes (48 hits)
Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
R099-O; 6/26/998. Under Title VII, an employer
who refuses the unwelcome and threatening sexual
advances of a supervisor, yet suffers no
adverse, tangible job consequences, may recover
against the employer without showing the
employer is negligent or otherwise at fault
for the supervisor's actions, but the employer
may interpose an affirmative defense. Kennedy,J.,
opinion.
97-569 Ellerth Kennedy,J.
Burlington-Industries-Inc. Opinion Title-VII
R100a.zs 07/02/98 14141 bytes (44 hits)
Faragher v. Boca Raton
R100; 6/26/98. An employer is vicariously liable
for actionable discrimination caused by a
supervisor, but subject to an affirmative defense
looking to the reasonableness of the employer's
conduct as well as that of the plaintiff victim.
Syllabus.
97-282 Faragher Souter,J. Vicarious-liability
Syllabus Boca Raton Title-VII
R100aa.zd 07/02/98 74463 bytes (23 hits)
Faragher v. Boca Raton
R100a; 6/26/98. An employer is vicariously
liable for actionable discrimination caused by
a supervisor, but subject to an affirmative
defense looking to the reasonableness of the
employer's conduct as well as that of the
plaintiff victim. Thomas,J., dissenting.
97-282 Faragher Thomas,J. Vicarious-liability
Dissent Boca Raton Title-VII Sex-harassment
R100_oa.zo 07/02/98 74463 bytes (18 hits)
Faragher v. Boca Raton
R100-O; 6/26/98. An employer is vicariously
liable for actionable discrimination caused
by a supervisor, but subject to an affirmative
defense looking to the reasonableness of the
employer's conduct as well as that of the
plaintiff victim. Souter,J., opinion.
97-282 Faragher Souter,J. Vicarious-liability
Opinion Boca-Raton Title-VII Sex-harassment
R097ba.zd 06/29/98 2925 bytes (31 hits)
U.S. v. Balsys
R097b; 6/25/98. A witness in a domestic
proceeding may not claim the Fifth Amendment
privilege against self-incrimination based on
fear of prosecution by a foreign nation.
Ginsburg,J., dissenting.
97-873 Balsys Ginsburg,J. Fifth-Amdt. U.S.
Dissent Self-incrimination Foreign-prosecution
R097ca.zd1 06/29/98 44621 bytes (18 hits)
U.S. v. Balsys
R097C; 6/25/98. A witness in a domestic
proceeding may not claim the Fifth Amendment
privilege against self-incrimination based on
fear of prosecution by a foreign nation.
Breyer, J., dissenting.
97-873 Balsys Breyer,J. Fifth-Amdt. U.S.
Dissent Self-incrimination Foreign-prosecution
R092a.zs 06/26/98 7443 bytes (26 hits)
Swidler & Berlin v. U.S.
R092p 6/25/98. Petitioner attorney's notes of his
interview with a client shortly before the
client's death are protected by the attorney-
client privilege from subpoena by the
Independent Counsel, who seeks to use the notes
in a criminal investigation. Syllabus.
97-1192 U.S. Rehnquist,C.J. Criminal-law
Swidler&Berlin Attorney-client-privilege
Independent-Counsel
R092aa.zd 06/26/98 14202 bytes (20 hits)
Swidler & Berlin v. U.S.
R092a; 6/25/98. Petitioner attorney's notes of
his interview with a client shortly before the
client's death are protected by the attorney-
client privilege from supoena by the Independent
Counsel, who seeks to use the notes in a
criminal investigation. O'Connor,J., dissenting.
97-1192 U.S. O'Connor,J. Criminal-law
Swidler&Berlin Dissent Attorney-client-privilege
Independent-Counsel
R092_oa.zo 06/26/98 25284 bytes (15 hits)
Swidler & Berlin v. U.S.
R092-O; 6/25/98. Petitioner attorney's notes
of his interview with a client shortly before
the client's death are protected by the attorney
client privilege from subpoena by the Independent
Counsel, who seeks to use the notes in a
criminal investigation. Rehnquist,C.J., opinion.
97-1192 U.S. Rehnquist,C.J. Criminal-law
Swidler&Berlin Opinion Attorney-client-privilege
Independent-Counsel
R093a.zs 06/26/98 11498 bytes (31 hits)
Clinton v. City of New York
R093; 6/25/98. The appellees have standing to
challenge the constitutionality of the Line
Item Veto Act; that Act's procedures for pres-
idential cancellation of items within duly
enacted laws violate the Presentment Clause.
97-1374 City-of-New-York Stevens,J.
Line-item-veto Clinton Syllabus Standing
Presentment-Clause
R093aa.zc 06/26/98 9635 bytes (25 hits)
Clinton v. City of New York
R093a; 6/25/98. The appellees have standing
to challege the constitutionality of the Line
Item Veto Act; that Act's procedures for
presidential cancellation of items within
duly enacted laws violate the Presentment
Clause. Kennedy,J., concurring.
97-1374 City-of-New-York Kennedy,J.
Line-item-veto Clinton Concur Standing
Presentment-Clause
R093ba.zx 06/26/98 40523 bytes (20 hits)
Clinton v. City of New York
R093b; 6/25/98. The appellees have standing to
challenge the constitutionality of the Line Item
Veto Act; that Act's procedures for presidential
cancellation of items within duly enacted laws
violate the Presentment Clause. Scalia,J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
97-1374 City-of-New-York Scalia,J.
Line-item-veto Clinton Concur/dissent
Standing Presentment-Clause
R093ca.zd 06/26/98 66742 bytes (9 hits)
Clinton v. City of New York
R093C; 6/25/98. The appellees have standing
to challenge the constitutionality of the
Line Item Veto Act; that Act's procedures for
presidential cancellation of items within duly
enacted laws violate the Presentment Clause.
Breyer, J, dissenting.
97-1374 City-of-New-York Breyer,J. Line-item-veto
Clinton Dissent Standing Presentment-Clause
R093_oa.zo 06/26/98 78587 bytes (12 hits)
Clinton v. City of New York
R093-O; 6/25/98. The appellees have standing
to challenge the constitutionality of the
Line Item Veto Act; that Act's procedures for
presidential cancellation of items within duly
enacted laws violate the Presentment Clause.
Stevens,J., opinion.
97-1374 City-of-New-York Stevens,J.
Line-item-veto Clinton Opinion Standing
Presentment-Clause
R094a.zs 06/26/98 17064 bytes (11 hits)
Eastern Enterprises, Inc. v. Apfel
R094; 6/25/98. In this challenge under the Due
Process and Takings Clauses, the Coal Industry
Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 (Coal Act)
provision that allocates liability for funding
health care benefits for retirees from the coal
industry and their dependents is unconstitutional
as applied to petitioner, a company that left the
coal industry in 1965. Syllabus.
97-42 Eastern-Enterprises-Inc. O'Connor,J.
Due-process Syllabus Apfel Coal-Act
Takings-Clause
R094aa.zc 06/26/98 2276 bytes (8 hits)
Eastern Enterprises, Inc. v. Apfel
R094a; 6/25/98. In this challenge under the Due
Process and Takings Clauses, the Coal Industry
Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 (Coal Act)
provision that allocates liability for funding
health care benefits for retirees from the coal
industry and their dependents is unconstitutional
as applied to petitioner, a company that left the
coal industry in 1965. Thomas, J., concurring.
97-42 Eastern-Enterprises-Inc. Thomas,J.
Due-process Concur Apfel Coal-Act Takings-Clause
R094ba.zx 06/26/98 28796 bytes (6 hits)
Eastern Enterprises, Inc. v. Apfel
R094B; 6/25/98. In this challenge under the
Due Process and Takings Clauses, the Coal
Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992
(Coal Act) provision that allocates liability
for funding health care benefits for retirees
from the coal industry and their dependents
is unconstitutional as applied to petitioner,
a company that left the coal industry in 1965.
Kennedy, J., concurring in judgment and
dissenting in part.
97-42 Eastern-Enterprises-Inc. Kennedy,J.
Due-process Concur/dissent Apfel Coal-Act
Takings-Clause
R094ca.zd 06/26/98 10281 bytes (8 hits)
Eastern Enterprises, Inc. v. Apfel
R094C; 6/25/98. In this challenge under the Due
Process and Takings Clauses, the Coal Industry
Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 (Coal Act)
provision that allocates liability for funding
health care benefits for retirees from the
coal industry and their dependents is
unconstitutional as applied to petitioner, a
company that left the coal industry in 1965.
Stevens,J., dissenting.
97-42 Eastern-Enterprises-Inc. Stevens,J.
Due-process Dissent Apfel Coal-Act
Takings-Clause
R094da.zd1 06/26/98 36061 bytes (4 hits)
Eastern Enterprises, Inc. v. Apfel
R094D; 6/25/98. In this challenge under the
Due Process and Takings Clauses, the Coal
Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992
(Coal Act)provision that allocates liability
for funding health care benefits for retirees
from the coal industry and their dependents is
unconstitutional as applied to petitioner, a
company that left the coal industry in 1965.
Breyer, J., dissenting.
97-42 Eastern-Enterprises-Inc. Breyer,J.
Due-process Dissent Apfel Coal-Act
Takings-Clause
R094_oa.zo 06/26/98 82056 bytes (5 hits)
Eastern Enterprises, Inc. v. Apfel
R094-O; 6/25/98. In this challenge under the
Due Process and Takings Clauses, the Coal
Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992
(Coal Act) provision that allocates liability
for funding health care benefits for retirees
from the coal industry and their dependents is
unsconstitutional as applied to petitioner,
a company that left the coal industry in 1965.
O'Connor,J., opinion.
97-42 Eastern-Enterprises-Inc. O'Connor,J.
Due-process Opinion Apfel Coal-Act
Takings-Clause
R095aa.zc 06/26/98 25976 bytes (11 hits)
National Endowment for Arts v. Finley
R095a; 6/25/98. 20 USC sec. 954(d)(1)--which
requires the National Endowment for the Arts to
consider "general standards of decency and
respect for ... diverse beliefs and values"
in awarding grants--is facially valid, as it
neither inherently interferes with First
Amendment rights nor violates constitutional
vagueness principles. Scalia, J., concurring
in the judgment.
97-371 Nat.-Endowment-for-Arts 20USC954(d)(1)
Fifth-Amdt. Concur Finley FIrst-Amdt. Scalia,J.
R095ba.zd 06/26/98 58945 bytes (10 hits)
National Endowment for Arts v. Finley
R095b; 6/25/98. 20 USC sec. 954(d)(1)--which
requires the National Endowment for the Arts
to consider "general standards of decency and
respect for ... diverse beliefs and values" in
awarding grants--is facially valid, as it neither
inherently interferes with First Amendment
rights nor violates constitutional vagueness
principles. Souter,J., dissenting.
97-371 Nat.-Endowment-for-Arts 20USC954(d)(1)
Fifth-Amdt. Dissent Finley First-Amdt.
Souter,J.
R095p.zs 06/26/98 10359 bytes (8 hits)
National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley
R095; 6/25/98. 20 USC sec. 954(d)(1)--which
requires the National Endowment for the Arts
to consider "general standards of decency and
respect for ... diverse beliefs and values" in
awarding grants--is facially valid, as it neither
inherently interferes with First Amendment rights
nor violates constitutional vagueness
principles. Syllabus.
97-371 Nat.-Endowment-for-Arts 20USC954(d)(1)
Fifth-Amdt. Opinion Finley First-Amdt.
O'Connor,J.
R095_oa.zo 06/26/98 43095 bytes (14 hits)
National Endowment for Arts v. Finley
R095-O; 6/24/98. 20 USC sec. 954(d)(1)--which
requires the National Endowment for the Arts to
consider "general standards of decency and
respect for ... diverse beliefs and values" in
awarding grants--is facially valid, as it neither
inherently interferes with First Amendment rights
nor violates constitutional vagueness principles.
O'Connor,J., opinion.
97-371 Nat.-Endowment-for-Arts 20USC954(d)(1)
Fifth-Amdt. Opinion Finley First-Amdt.
O'Connor,J.
R096a.zs 06/26/98 12545 bytes (36 hits)
Bragdon v. Abbott
R096; 6/25/98. The First Circuit was correct
that respondent's asymptomatic HIV infection
was a "disability" under the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, but did not cite
sufficient material to determine, as a matter
of law, that it posed no direct threat to others'
health and safety. Syllabus.
97-156 Bragdon AIDS Kennedy,J. Syllabus Abbott
HIV ADA
R096aa.zc 06/26/98 2618 bytes (15 hits)
Bragdon v. Abbott
R096a; 6/25/98. The First Circuit was correct
that respondent's aymptomatic HIV infection was
a "disability" under the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, but did not cite
sufficient material to determine, as a matter
of law, that it posed no direct threat to
others' health and safety. Stevens, J.,
concurring.
97-156 Bragdon AIDS Stevens,J. Concur Abbott
HIV ADA
R096ba.zc1 06/26/98 2522 bytes (16 hits)
Bragdon v. Abbott
R096b; 6/25/98. The First Circuit was correct
that respondent's asymptomatic HIV infection
was a "disability" under the Americans with
Disability Act of 1990, but did not cite
sufficient material to determine, as a matter
of law, that it posed no direct threat to
others' health and safety. Ginsburg, J.,
concurring.
97-156 Bragdon AIDS Ginsburg,J. Concur Abbott
HIV ADA
R096ca.zx 06/26/98 19358 bytes (7 hits)
Bragdon v. Abbott
R096C; 6/25/98. The First Circuit was correct
that respondent's asymptomatic HIV infection
was a "disability" under the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, but did not cite
sufficient material to determine as a matter of
law, that it posed no direct threat to others'
health and safety. Rehnquist,C.J., concurring in
judgment in part and dissenting in part.
97-156 Bragdon AIDS Rehnquist,C.J. Concur/dissent
Abbott HIV ADA
R096da.zx1 06/26/98 2336 bytes (7 hits)
Bragdon v. Abbott
R096D; 6/25/98. The First Circuit was correct
that respondent's asymptomatic HIV infection
was a "disability" under the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, but did not cite
sufficient material to determine, as a matter
of law, that it posed no direct threat to
others' health and safety. O'Connor,J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
97-156 Bragdon AIDS O'Connor,J. Concur/dissent
Abbott HIV ADA
R096_oa.zo 06/26/98 61657 bytes (14 hits)
Bragdon v. Abbott
R096-O; 6/25/98. The First Circuit was correct
that respondent's asymptomatic HIV infection
was a "disability" under the Americans with
Disability Act of 1990, but did not cite
sufficient material to determine, as a matter
of law, that it posed no direct threat to
others' health and safety. Kennedy, J., opinion.
97-156 Bragdon AIDS Kennedy,J. Opinion Abbott
HIV ADA
R097a.zs 06/26/98 10152 bytes (6 hits)
U.S. v. Balsys
R097; 6/25/98. A witness in a domestic proceeding
may not claim the Fifth Amendment privilege
against self-incrimination based on fear of
prosecution by a foreign nation. Syllabus.
97-873 Balsys Souter,J. Fifth-Amdt. U.S.
Syllabus Self-incrimination Foreign-prosecution
R097aa.zc 06/26/98 3573 bytes (6 hits)
U.S. v. Balsys
R097a; 6/25/98. A witness in a domestic
proceeding may not claim the Fifth Amendment
privilege against self-incrimination based on
fear of prosecution by a foreign nation.
Stevens,J., concurring.
97-873 Balsys Stevens,J. Fifth-Amdt. U.S.
Concur Self-Incrimination Foreign-prosecution
R097_oa.zo 06/26/98 80570 bytes (5 hits)
U.S. v. Balsys
R097-O; 6/25/98. A witness in a domestic
proceeding may not claim the Fifth Amendment
privilege against self-incrimination based on
fear of prosecution by a foreign nation.
Souter,J., opinion.
97-873 Balsys Souter,J. Fifth-Amdt. U.S.
Opinion Self-incrimination Foreign-prosecution
R088a.zs 06/24/98 5271 bytes (25 hits)
Caron v. U.S.
R088; 6/22/98. Where the State of conviction has
restored a felon's civil rights but restricts his
right to possess some types of firearms, his
prior conviction remains a conviction for
purposes of the federal firearms restrictions
and enhanced sentencing provisions of 18 USC
secs. 922(g) and 924(e). Syllabus.
97-6270 U.S. Kennedy,J. Civil-rights Caron
Syllabus Firearms Sentencing
R088aa.zd 06/24/98 7763 bytes (10 hits)
Caron v. U.S.
R088a; 6/22/98. Where the State of conviction
has restored a felon's civil rights but
restricts his right to possess some types of
firearms, his prior conviction remains a
conviction for purposes of the federal firearms
restrictions and enhanced sentencing provisions
of 18 USC secs. 922(g) and 924(e).
Thomas,J., dissenting.
97-6270 U.S. Thomas,J. Civil-rights Caron
Dissent Firearms Sentencing
R088_oa.zo 06/24/98 18012 bytes (6 hits)
Caron v. U.S.
R088-O; 6/22/98. Where the State of conviction
has restored a felon's civil rights but
restricts hs right to possess some types of
firearms, his prior conviction remains a
conviction for purposes of the federal firearms
restrictions and enhanced sentencing provisions
of 18 USC secs. 922 (g) and 924 (e). Syllabus.
97-6270 U.S. Kennedy,J. Civil-rights Caron
Syllabus Firearms Sentencing
R089a.zs 06/24/98 10625 bytes (18 hits)
United States v. Bajakajian
R089; 6/22/98. Full forfeiture, under 18 USC
sec.982(a)(1), of the $357,144 respondent failed
to report to the Government under 31 USC
sec. 5316(a)(1)(A), would violate the Excessive
Fines Clause because it would be grossly
disproportional to the gravity of respondent's
offense. Syllabus.
96-1487 Bjakajian Thomas,J. 18USC982(a)(1)
U.S. Syllabus 31USC5316(a)(1) Excessive-fines
R089aa.zd 06/24/98 28254 bytes (14 hits)
United States v. Bajakajian
R089a; 6/22/98. Full forfeiture, under 18 USC
sec. 982(a)(1), of the $357,144 respondent failed
to report to the Government under 31 USC sec.
5316(a)(1)(A), would violate the Excessive
Fines Clause because it would be grossly
disproportional to the gravity of respondent's
offense. Kennedy,J., dissenting.
96-1487 Bajakajian Kennedy,J. 18USC982(a)(1)
U.S. Dissent 31USC5316(a)(1) Excessive-fines
R089_oa.zo 06/24/98 55075 bytes (9 hits)
United States v. Bajakajian
R089-O; 6/22/98. Full forfeiture, under 18 USC
sec. 982(a)(1), of the $357.144 respondent failed
to report to the Government under 31USC
sec. 5316(a)(1)(A), would violate the Excessive
Fines Clause because it would be grossly
disproportional to the gravity of respondent's
offense. Thomas,J., opinion.
96-1487 Bajakajian Thomas,J. 18USC982(a)(1)
Opinion 31USC5316(a)(1) Excessive-fines
R090a.zs 06/24/98 6593 bytes (12 hits)
Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. Scott
R090; 6/22/98. The exclusionary rule, which
generally prohibits the introduction at criminal
trial of evidence obtained in violation of a
defendant's Fourth Amendment rights, does not
apply in parole revocation hearings. Syllabus.
97-581 Penn.-Bd.-of-Probation Thomas,J.
Exclusionary-rule Syllabus Scott Fourth-Amdt.
Parole
R090aa.zd 06/24/98 2109 bytes (4 hits)
Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. Scott
R090a; 6/22/98. The exclusionary rule, which
generally prohibits the introduction at criminal
trial of evidence obtained in violation of a
defendant's Fourth Amendment rights, does not
apply in parole revocation hearings. Stevens,J.
dissenting.
97-581 Penn.-Bd.-of-Probation Stevens,J.
Exclusionary-rule Dissent Scott Fourth-Amdt.
Parole
R090ba.zd1 06/24/98 27569 bytes (4 hits)
Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. Scott
R090b; 6/22/98. The exclusionary rule which
generally prohibits the introduction at criminal
trial of evidence obtained in violation of a
defendant's Fourth Amendment rights, does not
apply in parole revocation hearings., Souter,J.,
dissenting.
97-581 Penn.-Bd.-of-Probation Souter,J.
Exclusionary-rule Dissent Scott Fourth-Amdt.
Parole
R090_oa.zo 06/24/98 26907 bytes (6 hits)
Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. Scott
R090-O; 6/22/98. The exclusionary rule, which
generally prohibits the introduction at criminal
trial of evidence obtained in violation of
a defendant's Fourth Amendment rights, does not
apply in parole revocation hearings.
Thomas,J., opinion.
97-581 Penn.-Bd.-of-Probation Thomas,J.
Exclusionary-rule Scott Fourth-Amdt. Parole
R091a.zs 06/24/98 6515 bytes (5 hits)
Wisconsin Dept. of Corrections v. Schacht
R091; 5/22/98. The presence in an otherwise
removable case of a claim that may be barred
by the Eleventh Amendment does not destroy
the federal courts' removal jurisdiction to hear
the remaining claims. Syllabus.
97-461 Schacht Removal Eleventh-Amdt. Syllabus
Breyer,J. Jurisdiction
R091aa.zc 06/24/98 12955 bytes (5 hits)
Wisconsin Dept. of Corrections v. Schacht
R091a; 6/22/98. The presence in an otherwise
removable case of a claim that may be barred by
the Eleventh Amendment does not destroy the
federal courts' removal jurisdiction to hear the
remaining claims. Kennedy,J., concurring.
97-461 Schacht Removal Eleventh-Amdt.
Wisc.-Corrections-Dept. Concur Kennedy,J.
Jurisdiction
R091_oa.zo 06/24/98 25419 bytes (3 hits)
Wisconsin Dept. of Corrections v. Schacht
R091-O; 6/22/98. The presence in an otherwise
removable case of a claim that may be barred
by the Eleventh Amendment does not destroy
the federal courts' removal jurisdiction to hear
the remaining claims. Breyer, J., opinion.
97-461 Schacht Removal Eleventh-Amdt.
Wisc.-Corrections-Dept. Opinion Breyer,J.
Jurisdiction
R087a.zs 06/23/98 9289 bytes (25 hits)
Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School Dist.
R087; 6/22/98. Under Title IX of the Education
Amendemnts of 1972, monetary damages in an
implied cause of action may not be recovered
for teacher-student sexual harassment unless a
school district official with authority to
institute corrective meaures on the district's
behalf has actual notice of, and is deliberately
indifferent to, the teacher's misconduct.
Syllabus.
96-1866 Gebser O'Connor,J. Sex-harassment
Syllabus Lago-Vista-School Dist. Title-IX
Education
R087aa.zd 06/23/98 37184 bytes (13 hits)
Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School Dist.
R087a; 6/22/98. Under Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972, monetary damages in an
implied cause of action may not be recovered
for teacher-student sexual harassment unless a
school district official with authority to
institute corrective measures on the district's
behalf has actual notice of, and is deliberately
indifferent to, the teacher's misconduct.
Stevens,J., dissenting.
96-1866 Gebser Stevens,J. Sex-harrassment
Title-IX Education
R087ba.zd1 06/23/98 3028 bytes (9 hits)
Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School Dist.
R087b; 6/22/98. Under Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972, monetary damages in an
implied cause of action may not be recovered
for teacher-student sexual harassment unless a
school district official with authority to
institute corrective measures on the district's
behalf has actual notice of, and is deliberately
indifferent to, the teacher's misconduct,
Ginsburg,J., dissenting.
96-1866 Gebser Ginsburg,J. Sex-harassment
Dissent Lago-Vista-School-Dist. Title-IX
Education
R087_oa.zo 06/23/98 38617 bytes (8 hits)
Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School Dist.
R087-O; 6/22/98. Under Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972, monetary damages in an
implied cause of action may not be recovered
for teacher-student sexual harassment unless a
school district official with authority to
institute corrective measures on the district's
behalf has actual notice of, and is deliberately
indifferent to, the teacher's misconduct,
O'Connor,J., opinion.
96-1866 Gebser O'Connor,J. Sex-harassment
Opinion Lago-Vista-School-Dist. Title-IX
Education
R085a.zs 06/18/98 8354 bytes (6 hits)
Hohn v. U.S.
R085; 6/15/98. This Court has jurisdiction under
28 USC sec. 1254(1) to review a denial by a
circuit judge or a court of appeals panel on
an application under sec. 2253(c)(1) for a
certificate of appealability. Syllabus.
96-8986 Hohn Kennedy,J. 28USC1254(1) Syllabus
U.S. Appeals 28USC2253(c)(1)
R085aa.zc 06/18/98 1924 bytes (4 hits)
Hohn v. U.S.
R085a; 6/15/98. This Court has jurisdiction
under 28 US sec. 1254(1) to review a denial by
a circuit judge or a court of appeals panel on
an application under sec. 2253(c)(1) for a
certificate of appealability. Souter,J.,
concurring.
96-8986 Hohn Souter,J. 28USC1254(1) Concur
U.S. Appeals 28USC2253(c)(1)
R085ba.zd 06/18/98 29886 bytes (3 hits)
Hohn v. U.S.
R085b; 6/15/98. This Court has jurisdiction under
28 USC sec. 1254(1) to review a denial by a
circuit judge or a court of appeals panel on an
application under sec. 2253(c)(1) for a
certificate of appealability. Scalia, J.,
dissenting.
96-8986 Hohn Scalia,J. 28USC1254(1) Dissent
U.S. Appeals 28USC2253(c)(1)
R085_oa.zo 06/18/98 36470 bytes (5 hits)
Hohn v. U.S.
R085-O; 6/15/98. This Court has jurisdiction
under 28 sec. 1254(1) to review a denial by a
circuit judge or a court of appeals panel on an
application under sec. 2253(c)(1) for a
certificate of appealability. Kennedy, J.,
opinion.
96-8986 Hohn Kennedy,J. 28USC1254(1) Opinion
U.S. Appeals 28USC2253(c)(1)
R086a.zs 06/18/98 5055 bytes (12 hits)
Forney v. Apfel
R086; 6/15/98. A Social Security disability
claimant seeking court reversal of an agency
decision denying benefits may appeal a district
court order remanding the case to the agency
for further proceedings. Syllabus.
97-5737 Apfel Breyer,J. Disability Forney
Syllabus Social-security Appeals
R086_oa.zo 06/18/98 16151 bytes (6 hits)
Forney v. Apfel
R086-O; 6/15/98. A Social Security disability
claimant seeking court reversal of an agency
decision denying benefits may appeal a district
court order remanding the case to the agency
for further proceedings. Breyer,J., opinion.
97-5737 Apfel Breyer,J. Disability Forney
Opinion Social-security Appeals
R081a.zs 06/16/98 7884 bytes (13 hits)
Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation
R081; 6/15/98. Interest earned on client funds
deposited by an attorney in an "IOLTA" account is
the private property" of the client for Takings
Clause purposes. Syllabus.
96-1578 Phillips Rehnquist,C.J. Attorneys
Syllabus Wash.-Legal-Foundation IOLTA
Takings-Clause
R081aa.zd 06/16/98 18237 bytes (10 hits)
Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation
R081a; 6/15/98. Interest earned on client funds
deposited by an attorney in an "IOLTA" account
is the "private property" of the client for
Takings Clause purposes. Souter, J., dissenting.
96-1578 Phillips Souter,J. Attorneys Dissent
Wash.-Legal-Foundation IOLTA Takings-Clause
R081ba.zd1 06/16/98 10822 bytes (7 hits)
Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation
R081B; 6/15/98. Interest earned on client funds
desposited by an attorney in an "IOLTA" account
is the "private property" of the client for
Takings Clause purposes. Breyer, J., dissenting.
96-1578 Phillips Breyer,J. Attorneys Dissent
Wash.-Legal-Foundation IOLTA Takings-Clause
R081_oa.zo 06/16/98 34440 bytes (8 hits)
Phillips v. Washington Legal Foundation
R081-O; 6/15/98. Interest earned on client funds
deposited by an attorney in an "IOLTA" acccount
is the "private property" of the client for
Takings Clause purposes. Rehnquist, C.J., opinion
96-1578 Phillips Rehnquist,C.J. Attorneys
Opinion Wash.-Legal-Foundation IOLTA
Takings-Clause
R082a.zs 06/16/98 7325 bytes (10 hits)
Bryan v. U.S.
R082; 6/15/98. The term "willfully" in 18 USC
sec. 924(a)(1)(D) requires proof only that the
defendant knew that his firearms dealing
without a federal license was unlawful, not that
he also knew of sec. 922(a)(1)'s licensing
requirement. Syllabus.
96-8422 Bryan 18USC924(a)(1)(D) WillfulViolation
Syllabus U.S. Firearms Stevens,J.
R082aa.zc 06/16/98 1023 bytes (4 hits)
Bryan v. U.S.
R082; 6/15/98. The term "willfully" in 18 USC
sec. 924(a)(1)(D) requires proof only that the
defendant knew that his firearms dealing without
a federal license was unlawful, not that he also
knew of sec. 922(a)(1)'s licensing requirement.
Souter,J., concurring.
96-8422 Bryan 18USC924(a)(1)(D) WillfulViolation
Concur U.S. Firearms Souter,J.
R082ba.zd 06/16/98 1023 bytes (8 hits)
Bryan v. U.S.
R082b; 6/15/98. The term "willfully" in 18 USC
sec. 924(a)(1)(D) requires proof only that the
defendant knew that his firearms dealing without
a federal license was unlawful, not that he also
knew of sec. 922(a)(1)'s licensing requirement.
Scalia,J., dissenting.
96-8422 Bryan 18USC924(a)(1)(D) WillfulViolation
Dissent U.S. Firearms Scalia,J.
R082_oa.zo 06/16/98 46731 bytes (6 hits)
Bryan v. U.S.
R082-O; 6/15/98. The term "willfully" in 18 USC
sec. 924(a)(1)(D) requires proof only that the
defendant knew that his firearms dealing without
a federal license was unlawful, not that he also
knew of sec. 922(a)(1)'s licensing requirement.
Stevens,J., opinion.
96-8422 Bryan 18USC924(a)(1)(D) WillfulViolation
Opinion U.S. Firearms Stevens,J.
R083a.zs 06/16/98 3642 bytes (17 hits)
Pennsylvania Dept. of Corrections v. Yeskey
R083; 6/15/98. Title II of the Americans with
Disability Act of 1990, which prohibits a
"public entity" from discriminating against a
"qualified individual with a disability" on
account of that individual's disability
covers inmates in state prisons. Syllabus.
97-634 Yeskey Scalia,J. Disability
Pa.-Dept.-of Corrections Syllabus Prisoners
ADA
R083_oa.zo 06/16/98 14304 bytes (8 hits)
Pennsylvania Dept. of Corrections v. Yeskey
R083-O; 6/15/98. Title II of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, which prohibits a
"public entity" from discriminating against a
"qualified individual with a disability" on
account of that individual's disability covers
inmates in state prisons. Scalia,J., opinion.
97-634 Yeskey Scalia,J. Disability
Pa.-Dept.-of-Corrections Opinion Prisoners
ADA
R084a.zs 06/16/98 7075 bytes (9 hits)
AT&T Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.
R084; 6/15/98. The Communications Act's
filed-tariff requirements pre-empt respondent's
state-law claims against petitioner, a long
distance service provider, for breach of
contract and tortious-interference with contract.
Syllabus.
97-679 AT&T Scalia,J. CommunicationsAct
Syllabus Central-Office-Telephone Pre-emption
Filed-rate-doctrine
R084aa.zc 06/16/98 5823 bytes (6 hits)
AT&T Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.
R084a; 6/15/98. The Communications Act's
filed-tariff requirements pre-empt respondent's
state-law claims against petitioner, a long
distance service provider, for breach of
contract and tortious-interference with contract.
Rehnquist,C.J., concurring.
97-679 AT&T Rehnquist,C.J. CommunicationsAct
Concur Central-Office-Telephone Pre-emption
Filed-rate-doctrine
R084ba.zd 06/16/98 10741 bytes (6 hits)
AT&T Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.
R084b; 6/15/98. The Communications Act's
filed-tariff requirements pre-empt respondent's
state-law claims against petitioner, a long
distance service provider, for breach of
contract and tortious-interference with contract.
Stevens,J., dissenting.
97-679 AT&T Stevens,J. CommunicationsAct Dissent
Central-Office-Telephone Pre-emption
Filed-rate-doctrine
R084_oa.zo 06/16/98 30941 bytes (5 hits)
AT&T Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.
R084-O; 6/15/98. The Communications Act's
filed-tariff requirements pre-empt respondent's
state-law claims against petitioner, a long
distance service provider, for breach of contract
and tortious-interference with contract.
Scalia,J., opinion.
97-679 AT&T Scalia,J. CommunicationsAct
Opinion Central-Office-Telephone Pre-emption
Filed-rate-doctrine
R073a.zs 06/09/98 4996 bytes (14 hits)
U.S. v. Beggerly
R073; 6/8/98. Neither Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 60(b) nor the Quiet Title Act gave the
Fifth Circuit jurisdiction to reopen a
settlement agreement in which title to disputed
land was quieted in the United States in return
for a payment to respondents. Syllabus.
97-731 Beggerly Rehnquist,CJ. F.R.Civ.P.60(b)
U.S. Syllabus Quiet-Title-Act Jurisdiction
R073aa.zc 06/09/98 2247 bytes (7 hits)
U.S. v. Beggerly
R073a; 6/8/98. Neither Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 60(b) nor the Quiet Title Act gave
the Fifth Circuit jurisdiction to reopen a
settlement agreement in which title to disputed
land was quieted in the United States in
return for a payment to respondents. Stevens,J.
concurring.
97-731 Beggerly Stevens,J. F.R.Civ.P.60(b)
U.S. concur Concur Quiet-Title-Act Jurisdiction
R073_oa.zo 06/09/98 23103 bytes (6 hits)
U.S. v. Beggerly
R073-O; 6/8/98. Neither Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 60(b) nor the Quiet Title Act gave
the Fifth Circuit jurisdication to reopen
a settlement agreement in which title to
disputed land was quieted in the United States
in return for a payment to respondents.
Rehnquist,C.J., opinion.
97-731 Beggerly Renquist,C.J. F.R.Civ.P.60(b)
U.S. Opinion Quiet-Title-Act Jurisdiction
R074a.zs 06/09/98 10344 bytes (6 hits)
U.S. v. Bestfoods
R074; 6/8/98. Unless the corporate veil may be
pierced, a parent corporation that simply
participated in, and exercised control over,its
subsidiary's operations may not be held liable
under sec. 107(a)(2) of CERCLA as an "operator"
of the subsidiary's polluting facility; but a
parent that actively participated in, and
exercised control over, the operations of the
facility itself may be held directly liable
in its own right. Syllabus.
97-454 U.S. 42USC9607 CERCLA Syllabus Bestfoods
Souter,J. Environment
R074_oa.zo 06/09/98 48192 bytes (8 hits)
U.S. v. Bestfoods
R074-O; 6/8/98. Unless the corporate veil may
be pierced, a parent corporation that simply
participated in and exercised control over, its
subsidiary's operations may not be held liable
under sec. 107(a)(2) of CERCLA as an "operator"
of the subsidiary's polluting facility; but a
parent that actively participated in, and
exercised control over, the operations of the
facility itself may be held directly liable in
its own right. Souter, J., opinion.
97-454 U.S. 42USC9607(a)(2) CERCLA Opinion
Bestfoods Souter,J. Environment
R075a.zs 06/09/98 5907 bytes (13 hits)
Geissal v. Moore Medical Corp.
R075; 6/8/98. A Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act amendment to ERISA does not
permit an employer to deny continuation of health
insurance coverage to a qualified beneficiary
because he is covered under another health plan
at the time he elects COBRA coverage. Syllabus.
97-689 Moore-Medical-Corp. Souter,J. ERISA
Geissal Syllabus COBRA Health-care
R075_oa.zo 06/09/98 29074 bytes (9 hits)
Geissal v. Moore Medical Corp.
R075-O; 6/8/98. A Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act amendment to ERISA does not
permit an employer to deny continuation of
health insurance coverage to a qualified
beneficiary because he is covered under
another health plan at the time he elects
COBRA coverage. Souter,J., opinion.
97-689 Moore-Medical-Corp. Souter,J. ERISA
Geissal Opinion COBRA Health-care
R076a.zs 06/09/98 7351 bytes (5 hits)
Hopkins v. Reeves
R076; 6/8/98. This Court's decision in
Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 does not require
state trial courts to instruct juries on
offenses that are not lesser included offenses
of the charged crime under state law. Syllabus.
96-1693 Hopkins Nebraska Jury-instructions
Syllabus Reeves Capital-murder Thomas,J.
R076aa.zd 06/09/98 4885 bytes (7 hits)
Hopkins v. Reeves
R076a; 6/8/98. This Court's decision in
Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625, does not require
state trial courts to instruct juries on
offenses that are not lesser included offenses
of the charged crime under state law.
Stevens, J., dissenting.
96-1693 Hopkins Nebraska Jury-instructions
Dissent Reeves Capital-murder Stevens,J.
R076_oa.zo 06/09/98 28682 bytes (8 hits)
Hopkins v. Reeves
R076-O; 6/8/98. This Court's decision in
Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 does not require
state trial courts to instruct juries on
offenses that are not lesser included offenses
of the charged crime under state law.
Thomas,J., opinion.
96-1693 Hopkins Nebraska Jury-instructions
Opinion Reeves Capital-murder Thomas,J.
R077a.zs 06/09/98 7698 bytes (7 hits)
Cass County v. Leech Lake Bnd of Chippewa Indians
R077; 6/8/98. State and local governments may
impose ad valorem taxes on reservation land
that was made alienable by Congress and sold
to non-Indians but was later repurchased by
the Tribe. Syllabus.
97-174 Cass-County Ad-valorem-taxes Indians
Syllabus Leech-Lake-Band Thomas,J.
Reservation-land
R077_oa.zo 06/09/98 25340 bytes (4 hits)
Cass County v. Leech Lake Bnd of Chippewa Indians
R077-O; 6/8/98. State and local governments may
impose ad valorem taxes on reservation land
that was made alienable by Congress and sold
to non-Indians, but was later repurchased by
the tribe. Thomas,J., opinion.
97-174 Cass-County Ad-valorem-taxes Indians
Opinion Leech-Lake-Band Thomas,J.
Reservation-land
R078a.zs 06/09/98 5976 bytes (9 hits)
Dooley v. Korean Air Lines Co.
R078; 6/8/98. Because Congress has chosen not
to authorize a survival action for a
decedent's pre-death pain and suffering in the
Death on the High Seas Act, there can be no
general maritime survival action for such
damages. Syllabus.
97-704 Korean-Airlines-Co. Thomas,J.
DeathOnHighSeasAct Dooley Syllabus
Survival-action KAL007
R078_oa.zo 06/09/98 17275 bytes (6 hits)
Dooley v. Korean Air Lines Co.
R078-O; 6/8/98. Because Congress has chosen
not to authorize a survival action for a
decedents pre-death pain and suffering in the
Death on the High Seas Act, there can be no
general maritime survival action for such
damages. Thomas,J., opinion.
97-704 Korean-Air-Lines-Co. Thomas,J.
DeathOnHighSeasAct Dooley Opinion Survival-action
KAL007
R079a.zs 06/09/98 5347 bytes (11 hits)
Muscarello v. U.S.; Cleveland v. U.S.
R079; 6/8/98. The phrase "carries a firearm", as
it is used in 18 USC sec. 924(c)(1), applies to
a person who knowingly possesses and conveys
firearms in a vehicle, including in the locked
glove compartment or trunk of the car, which the
person accompanies. Syllabus.
96-1654 Syllabus U.S. Breyer,J. 96-8837
R079aa.zd 06/09/98 34101 bytes (11 hits)
Muscarello v. U.S.; Cleveland v. U.S.
R079a; 6/8/98. The phrase "carries a firearm"
as it is used in 18 USC sec. 924(c)(1), applies
to a person who knowingly possesses and
conveys firearms in a vehicle, including in the
locked glove compartment or trunk of the car,
which the person accompanies. Ginsburg, J.,
dissenting.
96-1654 Dissent U.S. Ginsburg,J. 96-8837
Muscarello Cleveland Firearms
R079_oa.zo 06/09/98 33596 bytes (8 hits)
Muscarello v. U.S.; Cleveland v. U.S.
R079-O; 6/8/98. The phrase "carries a firearm"
as it is used in 18 USC sec. 924(c)(1), applies
to a person who knowingly possesses and conveys
firearms in a vehicle, including in the locked
glove compartment or trunk of the car, which
the person accompanies. Breyer, J., opinion.
96-1654 Opinion U.S. Breyer,J. 96-8837
Muscarello Cleveland Firearms
R080a.zpc 06/09/98 9303 bytes (7 hits)
New Mexico v. Reed
R080; 6/8/98. In affirming a habeas grant
releasing respondent from custody despite the
fact that the New Mexico Governor had previously
ordered him extradited to Ohio, the New Mexico
Supreme Court exceeded its authority under the
Extradition Clause and the Extradition Act.
Per Curiam.
97-1217 Reed PerCuriam 18USC3182 New-Mexico
Habeas-corpus Extradition Release
R071a.zs 06/04/98 7421 bytes (7 hits)
U.S. v. Cabrales
R071; 6/1/98. A Missouri District Court is not
the proper venue for respondent's trial on
federal money-laundering charges where the
laundering alleged in the indictment occurred
entirely in Florida. Syllabus.
97-643 Cabrales Money-laundering Venue U.S.
Syllabus 18USC1956(a)(1)(B),1957 Ginsburg,J.
R071_oa.zo 06/04/98 17318 bytes (11 hits)
U.S. v. Cabrales
R071-O; 6/1/98. A Missouri District Court is
not the proper venue for respondent's trial
on federal money-laundering charges where the
laundering alleged in the indictment occurred
entirely in Florida. Ginsburg,J., opinion.
97-643 Cabrales Money-laundering Venue U.S.
Opinion 18USC1956(a)(1)(B),1957 Ginsburg,J.
R072a.zs 06/04/98 8211 bytes (6 hits)
Federal Election Comm'n v. Akins
R072; 6/1/98. Respondent voters have standing
to challenge the FEC's decision that an
organization is not a political committee
subject to Federal Election Campaign Act
requirements, and the case is remanded for
the FEC to decide the political committee issue
under its new regulations. Syllabus.
96-1590 Federal-Election-Comm'n Standing
Breyer,J. Syllabus Akins Political-comm.
Elections
R072aa.zd 06/04/98 18556 bytes (5 hits)
Federal Election Comm'n v. Akins
R072a; 6/1/98. Respondent voters have standing
to challenge the FEC's decision that an
organization is not a political committee
subject to Federal Election Campaign Act
requirements, and the case is remanded for
the FEC to decide the political committee
issue under its new regulations. Scalia,J.,
dissenting.
96-1590 Federal-Election-Comm'n Standing
Scalia,J. Dissent Akins Political-comm. Elections
R072_oa.zo 06/04/98 41059 bytes (5 hits)
Federal Election Comm'n v. Akins
R072-O; 6/1/98. Respondent voters have standing
to challenge the FEC's decision that an
organization is not a political committee
subject to Federal Election Campaign Act
requirements, and the case is remanded for the
FEC to decide the political committee issue
under its new regulations. Breyer,J., opinion.
96-1590 Federal-Election-Comm'n Standing
Breyer,J. Opinion Akins Political-comm.
Elections
97-7521A.ZA 05/28/98 2689 bytes (28 hits)
r001a.zpc 05/28/98 2981 bytes (15 hits)
r002a.zs 05/28/98 8733 bytes (8 hits)
r002a_o.zo 05/28/98 38941 bytes (9 hits)
r003a.zs 05/28/98 7342 bytes (11 hits)
r003a_o.zo 05/28/98 20891 bytes (6 hits)
R004a.zpc 05/28/98 11404 bytes (8 hits)
R004aa.zc 05/28/98 2871 bytes (4 hits)
R004ba.zd 05/28/98 10352 bytes (4 hits)
R004ca.zd1 05/28/98 15057 bytes (4 hits)
R005a.zs 05/28/98 6395 bytes (6 hits)
R005_oa.zo 05/28/98 30500 bytes (5 hits)
R006a.zs 05/28/98 5276 bytes (4 hits)
R006_oa.zo 05/28/98 16087 bytes (5 hits)
R007a.zs 05/28/98 8092 bytes (6 hits)
R007aa.zd 05/28/98 6999 bytes (4 hits)
R007_oa.zo 05/28/98 17465 bytes (3 hits)
R008a.zs 05/28/98 4036 bytes (6 hits)
R008_oa.zo 05/28/98 10636 bytes (4 hits)
R009a.zs 05/28/98 7069 bytes (5 hits)
R009aa.zc 05/28/98 2351 bytes (5 hits)
R009ba.zc1 05/28/98 16026 bytes (3 hits)
R009ca.zc2 05/28/98 7445 bytes (4 hits)
R009da.zc3 05/28/98 6683 bytes (5 hits)
R009_oa.zo 05/28/98 27505 bytes (5 hits)
R010a.zs 05/28/98 6069 bytes (5 hits)
R010aa.zc 05/28/98 9896 bytes (4 hits)
R010_oa.zo 05/28/98 28598 bytes (6 hits)
R011a.zs 05/28/98 7164 bytes (5 hits)
R011aa.zc 05/28/98 7779 bytes (5 hits)
R011ba.zx 05/28/98 14424 bytes (3 hits)
R011_oa.zo 05/28/98 20739 bytes (3 hits)
R012a.zs 05/28/98 9736 bytes (5 hits)
R012aa.zd 05/28/98 43603 bytes (4 hits)
R012_oa.zo 05/28/98 38517 bytes (3 hits)
R013a.zs 05/28/98 8354 bytes (5 hits)
R013_oa.zo 05/28/98 39045 bytes (3 hits)
R014a.zs 05/28/98 4874 bytes (4 hits)
R014_oa.zo 05/28/98 22373 bytes (3 hits)
R015a.zs 05/28/98 11310 bytes (3 hits)
R015aa.zc 05/28/98 4435 bytes (4 hits)
R015ba.zc1 05/28/98 21633 bytes (3 hits)
R015_oa.zo 05/28/98 40803 bytes (3 hits)
R016a.zs 05/28/98 5944 bytes (4 hits)
R016aa.zc 05/28/98 2101 bytes (5 hits)
R016ba.zd 05/28/98 4304 bytes (4 hits)
R016_oa.zo 05/28/98 17325 bytes (4 hits)
R017.zs 05/28/98 6102 bytes (4 hits)
R017_oa.zo 05/28/98 11167 bytes (4 hits)
R018a.zs 05/28/98 5325 bytes (4 hits)
R018aa.zc 05/28/98 2406 bytes (4 hits)
R018ba.zd 05/28/98 15944 bytes (4 hits)
R018_oa.zo 05/28/98 22843 bytes (3 hits)
R019a.zs 05/28/98 11604 bytes (4 hits)
R019aa.zd 05/28/98 33352 bytes (3 hits)
R019p.zs 05/28/98 11604 bytes (4 hits)
R019_oa.zo 05/28/98 61252 bytes (4 hits)
R020a.zs 05/28/98 11573 bytes (4 hits)
R020_oa.zo 05/28/98 62253 bytes (3 hits)
R021a.zs 05/28/98 7226 bytes (4 hits)
R021aa.zx 05/28/98 20199 bytes (3 hits)
R021ba.zx1 05/28/98 24721 bytes (4 hits)
R021_oa.zo 05/28/98 47118 bytes (4 hits)
R022a.zs 05/28/98 4204 bytes (4 hits)
R022aa.zc 05/28/98 942 bytes (3 hits)
R022ba.zc1 05/28/98 25985 bytes (4 hits)
R022ca.zd 05/28/98 7801 bytes (4 hits)
R022_oa.zo 05/28/98 23337 bytes (3 hits)
R023a.zs 05/28/98 4886 bytes (5 hits)
R023aa.zc 05/28/98 8444 bytes (4 hits)
R023ba.zd 05/28/98 2617 bytes (6 hits)
R023ca.zd1 05/28/98 27912 bytes (4 hits)
R023_oa.zo 05/28/98 15798 bytes (8 hits)
R024a.zpc 05/28/98 6944 bytes (4 hits)
R025a.zpc 05/28/98 3184 bytes (4 hits)
R026a.zs 05/28/98 12017 bytes (4 hits)
R026aa.zd 05/28/98 13511 bytes (5 hits)
R026_oa.zo 05/28/98 32376 bytes (3 hits)
R027a.zs 05/28/98 6546 bytes (4 hits)
r027_OA.ZO 05/28/98 17192 bytes (4 hits)
R028a.zs 05/28/98 11198 bytes (4 hits)
R028aa.zd 05/28/98 40070 bytes (4 hits)
R028_oa.zo 05/28/98 52486 bytes (5 hits)
R029a.zs 05/28/98 8815 bytes (4 hits)
R029_oa.zo 05/28/98 30458 bytes (3 hits)
R030a.zs 05/28/98 5692 bytes (4 hits)
R030aa.zc 05/28/98 7541 bytes (4 hits)
R030ba.zc1 05/28/98 2208 bytes (4 hits)
R030ca.zd 05/28/98 12853 bytes (3 hits)
R030_oa.zo 05/28/98 38930 bytes (3 hits)
R031a.zs 05/28/98 6928 bytes (4 hits)
R031_oa.zo 05/28/98 37857 bytes (3 hits)
R032a.zs 05/28/98 7417 bytes (5 hits)
r032_oa.zo 05/28/98 26216 bytes (4 hits)
R033a.zs 05/28/98 6574 bytes (4 hits)
R033_oa.zo 05/28/98 15182 bytes (3 hits)
R034a.zs 05/28/98 7283 bytes (4 hits)
R034_oa.zo 05/28/98 15892 bytes (4 hits)
R035a.zs 05/28/98 14643 bytes (4 hits)
R035_oa.zo 05/28/98 14643 bytes (4 hits)
R036a.zs 05/28/98 9378 bytes (5 hits)
R036aa.zc 05/28/98 2633 bytes (5 hits)
R036ba.zc1 05/28/98 3620 bytes (4 hits)
R036ca.zc2 05/28/98 63688 bytes (3 hits)
R036cp.zc2 05/28/98 63688 bytes (4 hits)
R036da.zc3 05/28/98 1655 bytes (4 hits)
R036_oa.zo 05/28/98 64189 bytes (4 hits)
R037a.zs 05/28/98 9645 bytes (5 hits)
R037aa.zc 05/28/98 1798 bytes (4 hits)
R037_oa.zo 05/28/98 41894 bytes (3 hits)
R038a.zs 05/28/98 9628 bytes (5 hits)
R038aa.zc 05/28/98 17793 bytes (3 hits)
R038ba.zd 05/28/98 9313 bytes (4 hits)
R038_oa.zo 05/28/98 37670 bytes (3 hits)
R039a.zs 05/28/98 8367 bytes (4 hits)
R039aa.zd 05/28/98 15528 bytes (3 hits)
R039_oa.zo 05/28/98 28185 bytes (3 hits)
R040a.zpc 05/28/98 3424 bytes (4 hits)
R041a.zpc 05/28/98 9432 bytes (3 hits)
R042a.zs 05/28/98 6126 bytes (3 hits)
R042_oa.zo 05/28/98 23712 bytes (3 hits)
R043a.zs 05/28/98 7822 bytes (3 hits)
R043aa.zd 05/28/98 60111 bytes (3 hits)
R043_oa.zo 05/28/98 56022 bytes (3 hits)
R044a.zs 05/28/98 10013 bytes (4 hits)
R044aa.zc 05/28/98 5212 bytes (4 hits)
R044ba.zx 05/28/98 15557 bytes (3 hits)
R044_oa.zo 05/28/98 31806 bytes (4 hits)
R045a.zs 05/28/98 3860 bytes (5 hits)
R045_oa.zo 05/28/98 34026 bytes (3 hits)
R046a.zs 05/28/98 5932 bytes (7 hits)
R046aa.zc 05/28/98 6532 bytes (4 hits)
R046ba.zd 05/28/98 52603 bytes (3 hits)
R046_oa.zo 05/28/98 34026 bytes (3 hits)
R047a.zs 05/28/98 6732 bytes (4 hits)
R047_oa.zo 05/28/98 35531 bytes (3 hits)
R048a.zs 05/28/98 7342 bytes (3 hits)
R048_oa.zo 05/28/98 19320 bytes (3 hits)
R049a.zpc 05/28/98 21427 bytes (3 hits)
R049aa.zd 05/28/98 1109 bytes (4 hits)
R050a.zs 05/28/98 5136 bytes (4 hits)
R050_oa.zo 05/28/98 18160 bytes (3 hits)
R051a.zs 05/28/98 8746 bytes (4 hits)
R051aa.zx 05/28/98 14603 bytes (3 hits)
R051_oa.zo 05/28/98 22288 bytes (3 hits)
R052a.zs 05/28/98 4937 bytes (4 hits)
R052_oa.zo 05/28/98 20888 bytes (3 hits)
R053a.zs 05/28/98 11944 bytes (4 hits)
R053aa.zc 05/28/98 18171 bytes (3 hits)
R053ba.zc1 05/28/98 18842 bytes (3 hits)
R053ca.zd 05/28/98 28247 bytes (3 hits)
R053da.zd1 05/28/98 48060 bytes (3 hits)
R053_oa.zo 05/28/98 55769 bytes (4 hits)
R054a.zs 05/28/98 8883 bytes (5 hits)
R054aa.zc 05/28/98 4105 bytes (4 hits)
R054ba.zc1 05/28/98 1569 bytes (3 hits)
R054_oa.zo 05/28/98 36440 bytes (3 hits)
R055a.zs 05/28/98 5388 bytes (4 hits)
R055_oa.zo 05/28/98 9920 bytes (5 hits)
R056a.zs 05/28/98 7369 bytes (4 hits)
R056aa.zc 05/28/98 5984 bytes (4 hits)
R056_oa.zo 05/28/98 41531 bytes (3 hits)
R057a.zs 05/28/98 10187 bytes (4 hits)
R057aa.zd 05/28/98 17667 bytes (3 hits)
R057_oa.zo 05/28/98 58094 bytes (3 hits)
R058a.zs 05/28/98 9331 bytes (4 hits)
R058aa.zc 05/28/98 1742 bytes (4 hits)
R058ba.zd 05/28/98 24015 bytes (3 hits)
R058ca.zd1 05/28/98 5328 bytes (4 hits)
R058_oa.zo 05/28/98 60214 bytes (3 hits)
R059a.zpc 05/28/98 761 bytes (7 hits)
R060a.zs 05/28/98 7035 bytes (4 hits)
R060aa.zx 05/28/98 12208 bytes (3 hits)
R060ba.zd 05/28/98 17648 bytes (3 hits)
R060_oa.zo 05/28/98 23458 bytes (3 hits)
R061a.zs 05/28/98 6539 bytes (4 hits)
R061aa.zd 05/28/98 6122 bytes (4 hits)
R061ba.zd1 05/28/98 12888 bytes (3 hits)
R061_oa.zo 05/28/98 16435 bytes (3 hits)
R062a.zs 05/28/98 4720 bytes (3 hits)
R062aa.zc 05/28/98 2751 bytes (4 hits)
R062ba.zc1 05/28/98 8796 bytes (5 hits)
R062_oa.zo 05/28/98 19924 bytes (4 hits)
R063a.zs 05/28/98 8282 bytes (4 hits)
R063aa.zd 05/28/98 31379 bytes (3 hits)
R063_oa.zo 05/28/98 34666 bytes (3 hits)
R064a.zs 05/28/98 12599 bytes (5 hits)
R064aa.zx 05/28/98 15151 bytes (3 hits)
R064_oa.zo 05/28/98 49923 bytes (3 hits)
R065a.zs 05/28/98 6841 bytes (4 hits)
R065_oa.zo 05/28/98 26827 bytes (3 hits)
R066a.zs 05/28/98 5509 bytes (6 hits)
R066_oa.zo 05/28/98 19365 bytes (5 hits)
R067a.zs 05/28/98 5407 bytes (6 hits)
R067aa.zd 05/28/98 15656 bytes (3 hits)
R067_oa.zo 05/28/98 17728 bytes (3 hits)
R068a.zs 05/28/98 10934 bytes (4 hits)
R068aa.zc 05/28/98 5104 bytes (4 hits)
R068ba.zd 05/28/98 37229 bytes (3 hits)
R068ca.zd1 05/28/98 8048 bytes (4 hits)
R068_oa.zo 05/28/98 104907 bytes (8 hits)
R069a.zs 05/28/98 9024 bytes (15 hits)
County of Sacramento v. Lewis
R069; 5/26/98. A police officer does not violate
substantive due process by causing death through
deliberate or reckless indifference to life
in a high-speed automobile chase aimed at
apprehending a suspected offender. Syllabus.
96-1337 Sacramento-County Souter,J.
Fourteenth-Amdt. Syllabus Lewis
High-speed-pursuit Due-process
R069aa.zc 05/28/98 2033 bytes (8 hits)
County of Sacramento v. Lewis
R069b; 5/26/98. A police officer does not
violate substantive due process by causing
death through deliberate or reckless indifference
to life in a high-speed automobile chase aimed
at apprehending a suspected offender. Kennedy,J.,
concurring.
96-1337 Sacramento-County Kennedy,J.
Fourteenth-Amdt. Concur Lewis High-speed-pursuit
Due-process
R069ba.zc1 05/28/98 6606 bytes (7 hits)
County of Sacramento v. Lewis
R069b; 5/26/98. A police office does not violate
substantive due process by causing death
through deliberate or reckless indifference to
life in a high-speed automobile chase aimed at
apprehending a suspected offender.
Kennedy,J., concurring.
96-1337 Sacramento-County Kennedy,J.
Fourteenth-Amdt. Concur Lewis High-speed-pursuit
Due-process
R069ca.zc2 05/28/98 1785 bytes (6 hits)
County of Sacramento v. Lewis
R069c; 5/26/98. A police officer does not
violate substantive due process by causing
death through deliberate or reckless
indifference to life in a high-speed automobile
chase aimed at apprehending a suspected offender.
Breyer, J., concurring.
96-1337 Sacramento-County Breyer,J.
Fourteenth-Amdt. Concur Lewis High-speed-pursuit
Due-process
R069da.zc3 05/28/98 2684 bytes (5 hits)
County of Sacramento v. Lewis
R069d; 5/26/98. A police officer does not
violate substantive due process by causing
death through deliberate or reckless indifference
to life in a high-speed automobile chase aimed
at apprehending a suspected offender.
Stevens,J., concurring in the judgment.
96-1337 Sacramento-County Stevens,J.
Fourteenth-Amdt. Concur Lewis High-speed-pursuit
Due-process
R069ea.zc4 05/28/98 15178 bytes (9 hits)
County of Sacramento v. Lewis
R069e; 5/26/98. A police offiver does not violate
substantive due process by causing death
through deliberate or reckless indifference
to life in a high-speed automobile chase aimed
at apprehending a suspected offender.
Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment.
96-1337 Sacramento-County Scalia,J.
Fourteenth-Amdt. Concur Lewis High-speed-pursuit
Due-process
R069_oa.zo 05/28/98 52502 bytes (9 hits)
County of Sacramento v. Lewis
R069-O; 5/26/98. A police officer does not
violate substantive due process by causing
death through deliberate or reckless indifference
to life in a high-speed automobile chase aimed
at apprehending a suspected offender. Souter,J.
opinion.
96-1337 Sacramento-County Souter,J.
Fourteenth-Amdt. Opinion Lewis High-speed-pursuit
Due-process
R070a.zs 05/28/98 8289 bytes (7 hits)
Air Line Pilots v. Miller
R070; 5/26/98. When a union adopts
arbitration to comply with the "impartial
decisionmaker"requirement of Teachers v. Hudson
475 U.S. 92, 310, nonmembers who have not agreed
to the arbitral remedy are not required to
exhaust it before suing to challenge the
union's agency-fee calculation. Syllabus.
97-428 Air-Line-Pilots Ginsburg,J. Agency-fees
Syllabus Miller Arbitration Labor-law
R070aa.zd 05/28/98 15851 bytes (6 hits)
Air Line Pilots v. Miller
R070a;5/26/98. When a union adopts arbitration
to comply with the "impartial decisionmaker"
requirement of Teachers v. Hudson, 475
U.S. 292, 310, nonmembers who have not agreed
to the arbitral remedy are not required to
exhaust it before suing to challenge the
union's agency-fee calculation. Breyer, J.,
dissenting.
97-428 Air-Line-Pilots Breyer,J. Agency-fees
Dissent Miller Arbitration Labor-law
R070_oa.zo 05/28/98 29740 bytes (11 hits)
Air Line Pilots v. Miller
R070-O; 5/26/98. When a union adopts arbitration
to comply with the "impartial decisionmaker"
requirement of Teachers v. Hudson, 475 U.S. 292
310, nonmembers who have not agreed to the
arbitral remedy are not required to exhaust it
before suing to challenge the union's agency-fee
calculation. Ginsburg,J., opinion.
97-428 Air-Line-Pilots Ginsburg,J. Agency-fees
Opinion Miller Arbitration Labor-law
Questions or comments regarding this service? Contact the GPO Access User Support Team
by Internet e-mail at gpoaccess@gpo.gov
![[ BACK ]](http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/images/icons/lefticn2.gif){kind=icon}
![[ DOCS HOME ]](http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/images/icons/homeicn2.gif){kind=icon}
![[ GPO HOME ]](http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/images/icons/gpohome.gif){kind=icon}
Updated: April 25, 1996