Cases - 1980 term

Diamond v. Bradley

Tue, 14 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-855

Appellee

Bradley

Petitioner Type

Appellee

Appellant

Diamond

Respondent Type

Appellant

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 381 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, October 14, 1980

Decided

Monday, March 9, 1981

Advocates

Nicholas Prasinos (on behalf of the Respondents)

Lawrence G. Wallace (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 4 votes for Bradley, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision:

None

Little v. Streater

Tue, 13 Jan 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-6779

Appellee

Streater

Petitioner Type

Appellee

Appellant

Little

Respondent Type

Appellant

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 1 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, January 13, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 1, 1981

Advocates

Jon C. Blue (on behalf of the Appellant)

Stephen J. McGovern (on behalf of the Appellee)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Little, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Due Process

None

Bullington v. Missouri

Wed, 14 Jan 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-6740

Petitioner

Bullington

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Missouri

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 430 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, January 14, 1981

Decided

Monday, May 4, 1981

Advocates

James Cook (on behalf of the Respondent)

Richard H. Sindel (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Bullington, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Double Jeopardy

None

Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie

Mon, 30 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1517

Petitioner

Federated Department Stores, Inc.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Moitie

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 394 (1981)

Argued

Monday, March 30, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 15, 1981

Advocates

Jerome I. Chapman (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Jerrold N. Offstein (on behalf of the Respondents)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 8 votes for Federated Department Stores, Inc., 1 vote(s) against
Legal provision: res judicata

None

New York v. Belton

Mon, 27 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-328

Petitioner

New York

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Belton

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

453 U.S. 454 (1981)

Argued

Monday, April 27, 1981

Decided

Wednesday, July 1, 1981

Advocates

Paul J. Cambria, Jr. (on behalf of the Respondent)

James R. Harvey (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Andrew L. Frey (on behalf of the United States as amicus curiae)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for New York, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Amendment 4: Fourth Amendment

None

United States v. Difrancesco

Mon, 06 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-567

Petitioner

United States

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Difrancesco

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

449 U.S. 117 (1980)

Argued

Monday, October 6, 1980

Decided

Tuesday, December 9, 1980

Advocates

Edgar C. NeMoyer (on behalf of the Respondent)

Andrew L. Frey (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for United States, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Double Jeopardy

None

Edwards v. Arizona

Wed, 05 Nov 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-5269

Petitioner

Edwards

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Arizona

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 477 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, November 5, 1980

Decided

Monday, May 18, 1981

Advocates

Crane McClennen (on behalf of the Respondent)

Michael J. Meehan (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Edwards, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Miranda Warnings

None

Texas Industries, Inc. v. Radcliff Materials, Inc.

Tue, 03 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1144

Petitioner

Texas Industries, Inc.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Radcliff Materials, Inc.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 630 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, March 3, 1981

Decided

Tuesday, May 26, 1981

Advocates

Dando B. Cellini (on behalf of the Respondents)

Wade H. McCree (on behalf of the United States as amicus curiae)

Benjamin R. Slater, Jr. (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Radcliff Materials, Inc., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Sherman

None

Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Transport Workers

Tue, 02 Dec 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1056

Petitioner

Northwest Airlines, Inc.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Transport Workers

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 77 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, December 2, 1980

Decided

Monday, April 20, 1981

Advocates

Stephen B. Moldof (on behalf of the Respondents)

Philip A. Lacovara (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Lawrence G. Wallace (on behalf of the United States as amicus curiae)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 8 votes for Transport Workers, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII

None

United States v. Will

Tue, 14 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-983

Appellee

Will

Petitioner Type

Appellee

Appellant

United States

Respondent Type

Appellant

Consolidation

No. 79-1689

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

449 U.S. 200 (1980)

Argued

Tuesday, October 14, 1980

Decided

Monday, December 15, 1980

Advocates

Kevin M. Forde (Argued the cause for the appellees)

Kenneth S. Geller (Argued the cause for the United States)

Facts of the Case

Congress enacted legislation in the late 1960s and early 1970s to adjust the compensation of federal employees, including judges, which provided automatic annual pay raises. However, from 1976 to 1979 Congress intervened and blocked cost-of-living increases which were scheduled to occur.

Question

Did the congressional acts between 1976 and 1979 violate the Constitution's Compensation Clause of Article III?

Conclusion

Decision: 8 votes for United States, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 28 U.S.C. 455

In two of the years in question, Congress effectively revoked automatic pay increases after the statutes guaranteeing those increases had already taken effect. This amounted to a reduction in salaries for judges and violated the Compensation Clause.

California v. Sierra Club

Wed, 21 Jan 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1252

Petitioner

California

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Sierra Club

Respondent Type

Respondent

Consolidation

No. 79-1502

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 287 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, January 21, 1981

Decided

Tuesday, April 28, 1981

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for California, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 33 U.S.C. 403

None

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hague

Mon, 06 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-938

Petitioner

Allstate Ins. Co.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Hague

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

449 U.S. 302 (1981)

Argued

Monday, October 6, 1980

Decided

Tuesday, January 13, 1981

Advocates

Mark M. Nolan (on behalf of Petitioner)

Andreas F. Lowenfeld (on behalf of Respondents)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Hague, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Article 4, Section 1: Full Faith and Credit Clause

None

American Textile Mfrs. Inst. v. Donovan

Wed, 21 Jan 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1429

Petitioner

American Textile Mfrs. Inst.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Donovan

Respondent Type

Respondent

Consolidation

No. 79-1583

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 490 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, January 21, 1981

Decided

Wednesday, June 17, 1981

Advocates

George H. Cohen (on behalf of the Union respondents)

Robert H. Bork (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Kenneth S. Geller (on behalf of the Respondent Marshall)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for American Textile Mfrs. Inst., 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Occupational Safety and Health

None

Minnick v. California Dept. Of Corrections

Tue, 02 Dec 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1213

Petitioner

Minnick

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

California Dept. Of Corrections

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 105 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, December 2, 1980

Decided

Monday, June 1, 1981

Advocates

Stuart R. Pollak (on behalf of the Respondents)

Ronald Yank (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 8 votes for California Dept. Of Corrections, 1 vote(s) against
Legal provision:

None

Alessi v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc.

Wed, 04 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1943

Petitioner

Alessi

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Consolidation

No. 80-193

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 504 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, March 4, 1981

Decided

Monday, May 18, 1981

Advocates

Warren J. Casey (on behalf of Appellees in 79-1943)

Laurence Reich (on behalf of Respondent in 80-193)

Theodore Sachs (on behalf of Appellants in 79-1943)

Marc C. Gettis (on behalf of Petitioners in 80-193)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 8 votes for Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Employee Retirement Income Security

None

Schweiker v. Gray Panthers

Wed, 29 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-756

Petitioner

Schweiker

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Gray Panthers

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

453 U.S. 34 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, April 29, 1981

Decided

Thursday, June 25, 1981

Advocates

George W. Jones (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Gill De Ford (on behalf of the Respondents)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for Schweiker, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Medicaid--provisions of the Social Security Act

None

Rodriguez v. Compass Shipping Co.

Mon, 12 Jan 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1977

Petitioner

Rodriguez

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Compass Shipping Co.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 596 (1981)

Argued

Monday, January 12, 1981

Decided

Monday, May 18, 1981

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Compass Shipping Co., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Longshoremen and Harbor Workers' Compensation

None

Flynt v. Ohio

Tue, 24 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-420

Petitioner

Flynt

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Ohio

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 619 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, March 24, 1981

Decided

Monday, May 18, 1981

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Ohio, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 28 U.S.C. 1257

None

Parratt v. Taylor

Mon, 02 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1734

Petitioner

Parratt

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Taylor

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 527 (1981)

Argued

Monday, March 2, 1981

Decided

Monday, May 18, 1981

Advocates

Kevin Colleran (on behalf of the Respondent, appointed by this Court)

J. Kirk Brown (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 8 votes for Parratt, 1 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Reconstruction Civil Rights Acts (42 USC 1983)

None

Howe v. Smith

Tue, 28 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-5392

Petitioner

Howe

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Smith

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 473 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, April 28, 1981

Decided

Wednesday, June 17, 1981

Advocates

Barbara E. Etkind (on behalf of the federal Respondents)

John J. Easton, Jr. (on behalf of the state Respondent)

William A. Nelson (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Smith, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 18 U.S.C. 5003

None

Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. August

Wed, 12 Nov 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-814

Petitioner

Delta Air Lines, Inc.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

August

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 346 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, November 12, 1980

Decided

Monday, March 9, 1981

Advocates

E. Allan Kovar (on behalf of the Petitioner,)

Susan M. Vance (on behalf of the Respondent,)

Elinor Hadley Stillman (as amici curiae)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for August, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including Appellate Procedure (or relevant rules of a circuit court)

None

United States v. Swank

Tue, 09 Dec 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1515

Petitioner

United States

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Swank

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 571 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, December 9, 1980

Decided

Monday, May 18, 1981

Advocates

LeRoy Katz (on behalf of the Respondents)

Stuart A. Smith (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 7 votes for Swank, 2 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Internal Revenue Code

None

Rosales-Lopez v. United States

Mon, 12 Jan 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-6624

Petitioner

Rosales-Lopez

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

United States

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 182 (1981)

Argued

Monday, January 12, 1981

Decided

Tuesday, April 21, 1981

Advocates

John J. Cleary (on behalf of the Petitioner)

George W. Jones (on behalf of the Respondent)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for United States, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision:

None

American Express Co. v. Koerner

Mon, 20 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-202

Petitioner

American Express Co.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Koerner

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 233 (1981)

Argued

Monday, April 20, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 8, 1981

Advocates

Louis R. Koerner, Jr. (on behalf of the Respondent)

Ronald J. Greene (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for American Express Co., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Truth in Lending

None

San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. San Diego

Mon, 01 Dec 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-678

Appellee

San Diego

Petitioner Type

Appellee

Appellant

San Diego Gas & Electric Co.

Respondent Type

Appellant

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 621 (1981)

Argued

Monday, December 1, 1980

Decided

Tuesday, March 24, 1981

Advocates

C. Alan Sumption (on behalf of the Appellees)

Louis E. Goebel (on behalf of the Appellant)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for San Diego, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 28 U.S.C. 1257

None

Anderson Bros. Ford v. Valencia

Mon, 23 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-84

Petitioner

Anderson Bros. Ford

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Valencia

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 205 (1981)

Argued

Monday, March 23, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 8, 1981

Advocates

Aaron J. Kramer (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Alan A. Alop (on behalf of the Respondents)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Anderson Bros. Ford, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Truth in Lending

None

Pennhurst State School v. Halderman

Mon, 08 Dec 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1404

Petitioner

Pennhurst State School

Respondent

Halderman

Consolidation

No. 79-1408

No. 79-1414

No. 79-1415

No. 79-1489

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 1 (1981)

Argued

Monday, December 8, 1980

Decided

Monday, April 20, 1981

Advocates

Thomas M. Kittredge (on behalf of the Petitioners Suburban Counties et al)

Joel I. Klein (on behalf of Petitioners Pennhurst Parents-Staff Association)

David Ferleger (on behalf of the Respondents Terri Lee Halderman et al)

Drew S. Days, III (on behalf of the United States as Respondent)

Thomas K. Gilhool (on behalf of the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens as Respondent)

Allen C. Warshaw (on behalf of the Petitioners Pennhurst State School and Hospital et al)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for Pennhurst State School, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 42 U.S.C. 6010

None

Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc.

Tue, 31 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-396

Petitioner

Newport

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Fact Concerts, Inc.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

453 U.S. 247 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, March 31, 1981

Decided

Friday, June 26, 1981

Advocates

Leonard Decof (on behalf of the Respondents)

Guy J. Wells (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for Newport, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Reconstruction Civil Rights Acts (42 USC 1983)

None

Board Of Govs., Frs v. Investment Company Inst.

Wed, 15 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-927

Petitioner

Board Of Govs., Frs

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Investment Company Inst.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 46 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, October 15, 1980

Decided

Tuesday, February 24, 1981

Advocates

G. Duane Vieth (on behalf of the Respondent)

Stephen M. Shapiro (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for Board Of Govs., Frs, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 12 U.S.C. 1843

None

U.S. Railroad Retirement Bd. v. Fritz

Mon, 06 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-870

Appellee

Fritz

Petitioner Type

Appellee

Appellant

U.S. Railroad Retirement Bd.

Respondent Type

Appellant

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

449 U.S. 166 (1980)

Argued

Monday, October 6, 1980

Decided

Tuesday, December 9, 1980

Advocates

Daniel P. Byron (on behalf of the Appellee)

Edwin S. Kneedler (on behalf of the Appellant)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 7 votes for U.S. Railroad Retirement Bd., 2 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Equal Protection

None

United States v. Morrison

Wed, 10 Dec 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Location

Residence of Morrison PA

United States

See map: Google Maps

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-395

Petitioner

United States

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Hazel Morrison

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

449 U.S. 361 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, December 10, 1980

Decided

Tuesday, January 13, 1981

Advocates

Peter Buscemi (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Salvatore J. Cucinotta (on behalf of the Respondent)

Facts of the Case

Hazel Morrison was indicted for distributing heroine and obtained private counsel for her defense. Without her counsel's knowledge two agents of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) conversed with her regarding a related investigation. During this conversation the agents advised that she have a public defender represent her instead of her private counsel. They also told her that the severity of her punishment would depend on how well she cooperated with them. Morrison notified her counselor immediately and did not speak to the agents about the investigation. She unsuccessfully petitioned the District Court to dismiss her indictment on the ground that the agents had violated her Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Morrison then entered a guilty plea to one count of the indictment. On appeal the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit found that Morrison's Sixth Amendment rights had been violated and ruled to drop all charges against her.

Question

Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit wrongfully dismiss criminal charges on the ground that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated in a way that had no tangible effect upon court proceedings?

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for United States, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Right to Counsel

Yes. Justice Byron White authored the opinion for the Court unanimously reversing the Third Circuit's decision. For sake of argument, the Court granted that Morrison's Sixth Amendment right to counsel had been violated, but held that this did not merit the dismissal of all charges since the conduct of the agents did not prejudice the outcome of the trial. The Court maintained that Sixth Amendment violations should not be remedied beyond the scope of the harm they inflicted upon the defendant.

Universities Research Assn. v. Coutu

Mon, 10 Nov 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

78-1945

Petitioner

Universities Research Assn.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Coutu

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 754 (1981)

Argued

Monday, November 10, 1980

Decided

Monday, April 6, 1981

Advocates

Robert E. Mann (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Robert Jay Nye (on behalf of the Respondents)

Harriet S. Shapiro (on behalf of the United States as amicus curiae)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Universities Research Assn., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 40 U.S.C. 276

None

Monroe v. Standard Oil Co.

Wed, 04 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-298

Petitioner

Monroe

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Standard Oil Co.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 549 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, March 4, 1981

Decided

Wednesday, June 17, 1981

Advocates

Paul S. McAuliffe (on behalf of the Respondent)

Alan I. Horowitz (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Standard Oil Co., 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 38 U.S.C. 2021

None

Hodel v. Indiana

Mon, 23 Feb 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-231

Appellee

Indiana

Petitioner Type

Appellee

Appellant

Hodel

Respondent Type

Appellant

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 314 (1981)

Argued

Monday, February 23, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 15, 1981

Advocates

Peter Buscemi (on behalf of the Appellants)

G. Daniel Kelly, Jr. (on behalf of the Appellees)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Hodel, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 30 U.S.C. 1201

None

Gulf Offshore Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp.

Tue, 31 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-590

Petitioner

Gulf Offshore Co.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Mobil Oil Corp.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

453 U.S. 473 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, March 31, 1981

Decided

Wednesday, July 1, 1981

Advocates

Frank E. Caton (on behalf of Respondent Mobil Oil Corporation)

Charles D. Kennedy (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Joseph D. Jamail (on behalf of Respondent Steven Gaedecke)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 8 votes for Gulf Offshore Co., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 43 U.S.C. 1331

None

Cuyler v. Adams

Tue, 07 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

78-1841

Petitioner

Cuyler

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Adams

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

449 U.S. 433 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, October 7, 1980

Decided

Wednesday, January 21, 1981

Advocates

James D. Crawford (on behalf of the Respondent)

Maria Parisi Vickers (on behalf of Petitioners)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for Adams, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Article 1, Section 10, Paragraph 3: Compact Clause

None

Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. v. Hall

Mon, 20 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

78-1789

Petitioner

Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Hall

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1981)

Opinion

453 U.S. 571 (1981)

Argued

Monday, April 20, 1981

Decided

Tuesday, July 7, 1981

Advocates

James Fleet Howell (on behalf of the Respondents)

Reuben Goldberg (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co., 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Natural Gas, or Natural Gas Policy Acts

None

Texas Dept. Of Community Affairs v. Burdine

Tue, 09 Dec 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1764

Petitioner

Texas Dept. Of Community Affairs

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Burdine

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 248 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, December 9, 1980

Decided

Wednesday, March 4, 1981

Advocates

Hubert L. Gil (on behalf of the Respondent)

Gregory Wilson (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Texas Dept. Of Community Affairs, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII

None

Beltran v. Myers

Tue, 24 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-5303

Petitioner

Beltran

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Myers

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 625 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, March 24, 1981

Decided

Monday, May 18, 1981

Advocates

Richard J. Magasin (on behalf of the Respondents)

Gill Deford (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Beltran, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Medicaid--provisions of the Social Security Act

None

Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division

Tue, 07 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Location

Indiana State Employment Security Division

10 N Senate Ave Indianapolis IN 46204

Indianapolis, IN 46204

United States

39° 46' 2.8524" N, 86° 9' 48.5928" W

See map: Google Maps

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-952

Petitioner

Eddie C. Thomas

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division et al.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 707 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, October 7, 1980

Decided

Monday, April 6, 1981

Advocates

Blanca Bianchi de la Torre (on behalf of the Petitioner)

William E. Daily (on behalf of the Respondent)

Facts of the Case

Eddie C. Thomas, a Jehovah's Witness and an employee of Blaw-Knox Foundry & Machinery Co., asked his company to lay him off when it transferred all of its operations to weapons manufacturing. He stated that his religious faith prohibited him from producing arms. His employer refused, so he quit instead. He applied for unemployment compensation benefits under the Indiana Employment Security Act, which the Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division denied. The board agreed that he quit because of his religious convictions, but claimed that this was not a "good cause [arising] in connection with [his] work" that would qualify him for benefits. The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the decision on the ground that it burdened Thomas' First Amendment right to the free exercise of his religion. The Supreme Court of Indiana reinstated the board's initial decision, calling Thomas' decision to quit a "personal philosophical choice" that only indirectly burdened his free exercise right.

Question

Does the Free Exercise Clause require a state to provide unemployment compensation benefits to an employee who quit because of a belief that his religion prohibited him from engaging in the employer's line of work?

Conclusion

Decision: 8 votes for Thomas, 1 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Free Exercise of Religion

Yes. In an 8-1 decision authored by Justice Burger, the Court held that the Review Board's denial of unemployment benefits to Thomas violated his First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. The Supreme Court of Indiana wrongfully used Thomas' struggle to "articulate" his religious beliefs as grounds to call his decision merely "philosophical." The Court's decisions in _ Everson v. Board of Education_ and Sherbert v. Verner had established that "[a] person may not be compelled to choose between the exercise of a First Amendment right and participation in an otherwise available public program." In his dissent, Justice Rehnquist argued that the free exercise clause did not require a "State to provide direct financial assistance to persons solely on the basis of their religious beliefs."

Lehman v. Nakshian

Tue, 31 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-242

Petitioner

Lehman

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Nakshian

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

453 U.S. 156 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, March 31, 1981

Decided

Friday, June 26, 1981

Advocates

Patricia J. Barry (on behalf of the Respondent)

Edwin S. Kneedler (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Lehman, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Age Discrimination in Employment (ADEA)

None

Jones v. Helms

Tue, 28 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-850

Appellee

Helms

Petitioner Type

Appellee

Appellant

Jones

Respondent Type

Appellant

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 412 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, April 28, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 15, 1981

Advocates

Carol Atha Cosgrove (on behalf of the Appellant)

James C. Bonner, Jr. (on behalf of the Appellee)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Jones, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Article 4, Section 2, Paragraph 1: Privileges and Immunities Clause

None

U.S. Postal Service v. Greenburgh Civic Assns.

Tue, 21 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-608

Appellee

Greenburgh Civic Assns.

Petitioner Type

Appellee

Appellant

U.S. Postal Service

Respondent Type

Appellant

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

453 U.S. 114 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, April 21, 1981

Decided

Thursday, June 25, 1981

Advocates

Edwin S. Kneedler (on behalf of the Appellant)

Jon H. Hammer (on behalf of the Appellees)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 7 votes for U.S. Postal Service, 2 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 18 U.S.C. 1725

None

County Of Washington v. Gunther

Mon, 23 Mar 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-429

Petitioner

County Of Washington

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Gunther

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 161 (1981)

Argued

Monday, March 23, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 8, 1981

Advocates

Barry Sullivan (on behalf of the United States et al. as amici curiae)

Carol A. Hewitt (on behalf of the Respondents)

Lawrence R. Derr (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Gunther, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII

None

Commissioner v. Portland Cement Co. Of Utah

Tue, 13 Jan 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1907

Petitioner

Commissioner

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Portland Cement Co. Of Utah

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 156 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, January 13, 1981

Decided

Tuesday, March 3, 1981

Advocates

Dennis P. Bedell (on behalf of the Respondent)

Stuart A. Smith (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Commissioner, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Internal Revenue Code

None

Hudson v. Louisiana

Mon, 01 Dec 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-5688

Petitioner

Hudson

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Louisiana

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

450 U.S. 40 (1981)

Argued

Monday, December 1, 1980

Decided

Tuesday, February 24, 1981

Advocates

Richard O. Burst (on behalf of the Petitioner)

James M. Bullers (on behalf of the Respondent)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for Hudson, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Double Jeopardy

None

Allen v. Mccurry

Wed, 08 Oct 1980 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-935

Petitioner

Allen

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Mccurry

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

449 U.S. 90 (1980)

Argued

Wednesday, October 8, 1980

Decided

Tuesday, December 9, 1980

Advocates

Jeffrey J. Shank (on behalf of the Respondent)

John J. Fitzgibbon (on behalf of the Petitioners)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for Allen, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Reconstruction Civil Rights Acts (42 USC 1983)

None

Heffron v. Int. Society for Krishna Consciousness

Mon, 20 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-795

Petitioner

Heffron

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Int. Society for Krishna Consciousness

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 640 (1981)

Argued

Monday, April 20, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 22, 1981

Advocates

Laurence H. Tribe (Argued the cause for the respondents)

Kent G. Harbison (Argued the cause for the petitioners)

Facts of the Case

A Minnesota law allowed the Minnesota Agricultural Society to devise rules to regulate the annual state fair in St. Paul. Minnesota State Fair Rule 6.05 required organizations wishing to sell or distribute goods and written material to do so from an assigned location on the fairgrounds. In other words, walking vendors and solicitors were not allowed. The International Society for Krishna Consciousness challenged the rule, arguing that it restricted the ability of its followers to freely exercise their religious beliefs at the state fair.

Question

May a state, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, confine religious organizations wishing to sell and distribute religious literature at a state fair to an assigned location within the fairgrounds?

Conclusion

Decision: 5 votes for Heffron, 4 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Free Exercise of Religion

Using the "valid time, manner, and place" criteria which the Court employs to assess government restrictions of First Amendment activities, the Court held that Rule 6.05 did not violate the Constitution. Since the rule was applied equally to all groups wanting to solicit at the fairgrounds, not making restrictions based on the content of a group's message, and because the state had an important interest in "protecting the safety and convenience" of the fair's patrons, Justice White argued that the rule's restrictions were legitimate. Allowing all religious, nonreligious, and commercial groups to move about the grounds distributing literature and soliciting funds would result in "widespread disorder" which would be potentially dangerous to the fair's visitors.

Rowan Cos. v. United States

Tue, 21 Apr 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

80-780

Petitioner

Rowan Cos.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

United States

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

452 U.S. 247 (1981)

Argued

Tuesday, April 21, 1981

Decided

Monday, June 8, 1981

Advocates

Stuart A. Smith (on behalf of the Respondent)

K. Martin Worthy (on behalf of the Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 6 votes for Rowan Cos., 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Internal Revenue Code

None

J. Truett Payne Co. v. Chrysler Motors Corp.

Wed, 21 Jan 1981 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

79-1944

Petitioner

J. Truett Payne Co.

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Chrysler Motors Corp.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Decided By

Burger Court (1975-1981)

Opinion

451 U.S. 557 (1981)

Argued

Wednesday, January 21, 1981

Decided

Monday, May 18, 1981

Advocates

C. Lee Reeves (on behalf of the Petitioner)

J. Ross Forman, III (on behalf of the Respondent)

Facts of the Case

None

Question

None

Conclusion

Decision: 9 votes for J. Truett Payne Co., 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Robinson-Patman

None