The Oyez Project: 1982 Term

Akron v. Akron Center For Reproductive Health (No. 81-746)

No details yet.

American Bank & Trust Co. v. Dallas County (No. 81-1717)

No details yet.

American Paper Inst. v. American Elec. Power (No. 82-34)

No details yet.

Anderson v. Celebrezze (No. 81-1635)

No details yet.

Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris (No. 82-52)

No details yet.

Arizona v. California (No. 8 ORIG)

No details yet.

Arizona v. San Carlos Apache Tribe (No. 81-2147)

No details yet.

Arkansas Elec. Coop. v. Ark. Public Ser v. Comm'n (No. 81-731)

No details yet.

Associated General Contractors v. Carpenters (No. 81-334)

No details yet.

Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. Nrdc (No. 82-524)

No details yet.

Bankamerica Corp. v. United States (No. 81-1487)

A California law dictated that before additional nuclear power plants could be built, the state energy commission had to determine that there would be adequate storage capacity for spent fuel rods. Two utility companies challenged the law, arguing that its provisions had been preempted by the federal Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

Barclay v. Florida (No. 81-6908)

No details yet.

Barefoot v. Estelle (No. 82-6080)

No details yet.

Bearden v. Georgia (No. 81-6633)

No details yet.

Belknap, Inc. v. Hale (No. 81-1966)

Helm was convicted of writing a check from a fictitious account, a crime carrying with it a five-year jail sentence. However, since this was his seventh felony conviction in South Dakota since 1964, he was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole under a state recidivist statute.

Bell v. New Jersey (No. 81-2125)

No details yet.

Bell v. United States (No. 82-5119)

No details yet.

Bill Johnson's Restaurants, Inc. v. NLRB (No. 81-2257)

No details yet.

Block v. Neal (No. 81-1494)

No details yet.

Block v. North Dakota (No. 81-2337)

No details yet.

Bob Jones University v. U. S. (No. 81-3)

No details yet.

Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp. (No. 81-1590)

No details yet.

Bowen v. United States Postal Service (No. 81-525)

No details yet.

Bowsher v. Merck & Co. (No. 81-1273)

(Tom Feledy prepared this summary.)

A traveler at an airport alerted the suspicions of drug agents, who, based upon his behavior and discrepancies in his luggage tags, believed he was carrying narcotics. They relayed this information to fellow agents at his destination airport. There, the agents met him and seized his bags without his consent. Ninety minutes after the seizure, his bags were subjected to a "sniff" test by a drug-detection dog. The dog signaled the presence of a controlled substance in one of the bags. The agents then obtained a warrant for that suitcase, which turned out to contain cocaine, and the man was convicted of the drug offense. The Court of Appeals reversed his conviction on the ground that the ninety minutes exceeded the investigative stop permitted by Terry v. Ohio

, and thus violated the Fourth Amendment's search and seizure privilege.

Briscoe v. Lahue (No. 81-1404)

No details yet.

Brown v. Socialist Workers '74 Campaign Comm. (No. 81-776)

No details yet.

Brown v. Thompson (No. 82-65)

No details yet.

Burlington Northern Inc. v. United States (No. 81-1008)

In 1976, police officers of the City of Los Angeles stopped Adolph Lyons for a traffic code violation. Although Lyons offered no resistance, the officers, without provocation, seized Lyons and applied a chokehold. The hold rendered Lyons unconscious and damaged his larynx. Along with damages against the officers, Lyons sought an injunction against the City barring the use of such control holds.

Bush v. Lucas (No. 81-469)

No details yet.

California v. Ramos (No. 81-1893)

No details yet.

Carpenters v. Scott (No. 82-486)

No details yet.

Chappell v. Wallace (No. 82-167)

No details yet.

Chardon v. Fumero Soto (No. 82-271)

No details yet.

Colorado v. New Mexico (No. 80 ORIG)

No details yet.

Commissioner v. Tufts (No. 81-1536)

No details yet.

Community Television Of So. Cal. v. Gottfried (No. 81-298)

No details yet.

Connecticut v. Johnson (No. 81-927)

No details yet.

Connick v. Myers (No. 81-1251)

No details yet.

Container Corp. v. Franchise Tax Bd. (No. 81-523)

No details yet.

Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. Parker (No. 82-118)

No details yet.

D.C. Court Of Appeals v. Feldman (No. 81-1335)

No details yet.

Delcostello v. Teamsters (No. 81-2386)

No details yet.

Dickerson v. New Banner Institute, Inc. (No. 81-1180)

Lawson was a law-abiding black man of unusual deportment (he wore his hair in long dreadlocks). Lawson was frequently subjected to police questioning and harassment when he walked in white neighborhoods. Lawson challenged the California law "that requires persons who loiter or wander on the streets to provide a 'credible and reliable' identification and to account for their presence when requested by a peace officer."

Director, Owcp v. Perini North River Assoc. (No. 81-897)

No details yet.

Dirks v. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) (No. 82-276)

No details yet.

Edward J. Debartolo Corp. v. NLRB (No. 81-1985)

No details yet.

EEOC v. Wyoming (No. 81-554)

No details yet.

Energy Reserves Group v. Kansas Power & Light (No. 81-1370)

No details yet.

Exxon Corp. v. Eagerton (No. 81-1020)

No details yet.

Fall City Industries v. Vanco Beverage (No. 81-1271)

No details yet.

Fec v. National Right To Work Committee (No. 81-1506)

No details yet.

Firefighters v. Boston Chapter, NAACP (No. 82-185)

No details yet.

First Nat. City Bank v. Banco Para El Comercio (No. 81-984)

No details yet.

Florida v. Casal (No. 81-2318)

No details yet.

Florida v. Royer (No. 80-2146)

No details yet.

Franchise Tax Bd. v. Laborers Vacation Trust (No. 82-695)

No details yet.

Ftc v. Grolier Inc. (No. 82-372)

No details yet.

General Motors Corp. v. Devex Corp. (No. 81-1661)

No details yet.

Gillette Co. v. Miner (No. 81-1493)

Democrats in control of the New Jersey Legislature designed a plan for congressional redistricting in the state which the outgoing Democratic governor signed into law. Even though the district populations differed by less than one percent from each other, they were clearly drawn to maximize Democratic power in the state.

Guardians Assn. v. Civil Service Comm'n, N. Y. C. (No. 81-431)

No details yet.

Haring v. Prosise (No. 81-2169)

No details yet.

Heckler v. Campbell (No. 81-1983)

No details yet.

Hensley v. Eckerhart (No. 81-1244)

No details yet.

Herman & Maclean v. Huddleston (No. 81-680)

No details yet.

Hewitt v. Helms (No. 81-638)

No details yet.

Hillsboro National Bank v. Commissioner (No. 81-485)

No details yet.

Idaho Ex Rel. Evans v. Oregon (No. 67 ORIG)

No details yet.

Illinois v. Abbott & Associates, Inc. (No. 81-1114)

No details yet.

Illinois v. Andreas (No. 81-1843)

No details yet.

Illinois v. Gates (No. 81-430)

No details yet.

Illinois v. Lafayette (No. 81-1859)

No details yet.

Jefferson County Pharm. Assn. v. Abbott Labs. (No. 81-827)

No details yet.

Jim Mcneff, Inc. v. Todd (No. 81-2150)

No details yet.

Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. Pfeifer (No. 82-131)

No details yet.

Jones v. Barnes (No. 81-1794)

No details yet.

Jones v. United States (No. 81-5195)

No details yet.

Karcher v. Daggett (No. 81-2057)

No details yet.

Kolender v. Lawson (No. 81-1320)

No details yet.

Kush v. Rutledge (No. 81-1675)

No details yet.

Landon v. Plasencia (No. 81-129)

No details yet.

Larkin v. Grendel's Den, Inc. (No. 81-878)

No details yet.

Lehr v. Robertson (No. 81-1756)

No details yet.

Lockhart v. United States (No. 81-802)

No details yet.

Lockheed Aircraft Corp. v. United States (No. 81-1181)

No details yet.

Los Angeles v. Lyons (No. 81-1064)

No details yet.

Marsh v. Chambers (No. 82-23)

No details yet.

Marshall v. Lonberger (No. 81-420)

No details yet.

Martinez v. Bynum (No. 81-857)

No details yet.

Memphis Bank & Trust Co. v. Garner (No. 81-1613)

The Bloomingdale, Illinois Police Department received an anonymous tip that Lance and Susan Gates were selling drugs out of their home. After observing the Gates's drug smuggling operation in action, police obtained a warrant and upon searching the suspects' car and home uncovered large quantities of marijuana, other contraband, and weapons.

Mennonite Board Of Missions v. Adams (No. 82-11)

No details yet.

Metropolitan Edison Co. v. NLRB (No. 81-1664)

No details yet.

Metropolitan Edison v. People Vs. Nuclear Energy (No. 81-2399)

No details yet.

Michigan v. Long (No. 82-256)

No details yet.

Minn. Star & Trib. Co. v. MN Comm. of Rev. (No. 81-1839)

No details yet.

Missouri v. Hunter (No. 81-1214)

No details yet.

Montana v. Jackson (No. 81-1531)

No details yet.

Morris v. Slappy (No. 81-1095)

No details yet.

Morrison-Knudsen Constr. Co. v. Director, Owcp (No. 81-1891)

No details yet.

Moses H. Cone Hospital v. Mercury Constr. Corp. (No. 81-1203)

No details yet.

Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. v. State Farm Mut. (No. 82-354)

No details yet.

Mueller v. Allen (No. 82-195)

No details yet.

National Assn. Of Greeting Card Pubs. v. Usps (No. 81-1304)

No details yet.

Nevada v. United States (No. 81-2245)

No details yet.

New Mexico v. Mescalero Apache Tribe (No. 82-331)

No details yet.

Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock v. EEOC (No. 82-411)

No details yet.

NLRB v. Transportation Management Corp. (No. 82-168)

No details yet.

North Dakota v. United States (No. 81-773)

No details yet.

Olim v. Wakinekona (No. 81-1581)

Bob Jones University was dedicated to "fundamentalist Christian beliefs" which included prohibitions against interracial dating and marriage. Such behavior would lead to expulsion. In 1970, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) changed its formal policy to adopt a district court decision that prohibited the IRS from giving tax-exempt status to private schools engaging in racial discrimination. The IRS believed that the University's policies amounted to racism and revoked its tax-exempt status. The University claimed that the IRS had abridged its religious liberty. This case was decided together with Goldsboro Christian Schools Inc. v. United States, in which Goldsboro maintained a racially discriminatory admissions policy based upon its interpretation of the Bible, accepting for the most part only Caucasian students. The IRS determined that Goldsboro was not an exempt organization and hence was required to pay federal social security and unemployment taxes. After paying a portion of such taxes for certain years, Goldsboro filed a refund suit claiming that the denial of its tax-exempt status violated the U.S. Constitution.

Operating Engineers v. Jones (No. 81-1574)

No details yet.

Oregon v. Bradshaw (No. 81-1857)

No details yet.

Pacific G & E Co. v. State Energy Res. C & D Com. (No. 81-1945)

No details yet.

Pallas Shipping Agency, Ltd. v. Duris (No. 82-502)

No details yet.

Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman (No. 81-2101)

In apportioning its state legislative seats, the State of Wyoming made provisions to allocate to each county at least one state representative. With the state's total population and its sixty-four House seats, the ideal apportionment would have been 7,337 persons per representative. Given the guarantee of county representation, Niobrara County, with a population of less than half the ideal (2,924), was allocated a House seat.

Perry Ed. Assn. v. Perry Local Educators' Assn. (No. 81-896)

No details yet.

Philko Aviation, Inc. v. Shacket (No. 82-342)

No details yet.

Pickett v. Brown (No. 82-5576)

No details yet.

Pillsbury Co. v. Conboy (No. 81-825)

No details yet.

Planned Parenthood Assn. v. Ashcroft (No. 81-1255)

No details yet.

Port Arthur v. United States (No. 81-708)

No details yet.

Public Service Comm'n v. Mid-Louisiana Gas Co. (No. 81-1889)

No details yet.

Regan v. Taxation With Representation Of Wash. (No. 81-2338)

No details yet.

Revere v. Massachusetts General Hospital (No. 82-63)

No details yet.

Rice v. Rehner (No. 82-401)

No details yet.

Ruckelshaus v. Sierra Club (No. 82-242)

No details yet.

Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. (No. 81-1578)

No details yet.

Shepard v. NLRB (No. 81-1627)

No details yet.

Simopoulos v. Virginia (No. 81-185)

No details yet.

Smith v. Wade (No. 81-1196)

No details yet.

Solem v. Helm (No. 82-492)

No details yet.

Sony Corp v. Universal City Studios (No. 81-1687)

No details yet.

South Dakota v. Neville (No. 81-1453)

No details yet.

Texas v. Brown (No. 81-419)

No details yet.

Texas v. New Mexico (No. 65 ORIG)

No details yet.

Tuten v. United States (No. 81-6756)

No details yet.

U.S. Postal Service Bd. Of Govs. v. Aikens (No. 81-1044)

No details yet.

United States v. $8,850 (No. 81-1062)

No details yet.

United States v. Baggot (No. 81-1938)

No details yet.

United States v. Generix Drug Corp. (No. 81-1222)

No details yet.

United States v. Grace (No. 81-1863)

No details yet.

United States v. Hasting (No. 81-1463)

No details yet.

United States v. Knotts (No. 81-1802)

No details yet.

United States v. Mitchell (No. 81-1748)

No details yet.

United States v. Place (No. 81-1617)

Bush, an aerospace engineer at the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center (Center), a facility operated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), made a series of public comments critical of the Center. Lucas, the Center_s director, demoted Bush on the ground that the comments were false and misleading. The Federal Employee Appeals Authority upheld the demotion, but the Civil Service Commission_s (CSC) Appeals Review Board later found that the demotion had violated his First Amendment rights. NASA accepted the Board_s recommendation that Bush be restored to his former position retroactively, with back pay. While his administrated appeal was pending, Bush brought suit against Lucas in Alabama state court, seeking to recover damages for violation of his First Amendment rights. Lucas removed the action to federal district court, which granted summary judgment for Lucas. The Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding that Bush had no cause of action for damages under the First Amendment in view of the available remedies under the CSC regulations.

United States v. Ptasynski (No. 82-1066)

No details yet.

United States v. Rodgers (No. 81-1476)

No details yet.

United States v. Rylander (No. 81-1120)

No details yet.

United States v. Security Industrial Bank (No. 81-184)

No details yet.

United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc. (No. 81-1032)

No details yet.

United States v. Villamonte-Marquez (No. 81-1350)

No details yet.

United States v. Whiting Pools, Inc. (No. 82-215)

No details yet.

Verlinden B. V. v. Central Bank Of Nigeria (No. 81-920)

No details yet.

W. R. Grace & Co. v. Rubber Workers (No. 81-1314)

No details yet.

Washington v. United States (No. 81-969)

No details yet.

Watt v. Western Nuclear, Inc. (No. 81-1686)

No details yet.

White v. Mass. Council Of Constr. Employers (No. 81-1003)

No details yet.

Xerox Corp. v. County Of Harris (No. 81-1489)

No details yet.

Zant v. Stephens (No. 81-89)

No details yet.