Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Marshall Vs. Barlow's, Inc.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 23, 1978

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

55 entries 7 linked 48 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Chadwick US Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1977
  2. United States Vs. Biswell US Supreme Court · May 15, 1972
  3. Terry Vs. Ohio US Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1968
  4. South Dakota Vs. Opperman US Supreme Court · Jul 06, 1976
  5. United States Vs. Martinez-fuerte US Supreme Court · Jul 06, 1976
  6. Cady Vs. Dombrowski US Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1973
  7. Chambers Vs. Maroney US Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1970
  8. Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  9. Inc. - 436 U.S. 307 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  10. Inc., 436 U.S. 307 (1978) Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  11. of OSHA regulations. A three-judge District Court ruled in appellee's favor, concluding, in reliance on Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  12. Court, 387 U. S. 523 , 387 U. S. 528 -529, and See v. Seattle
    Search
  13. The rule that warrantless searches are generally unreasonable applies to commercial premises as well as homes. Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  14. Court, supra, and See v. Seattle
    Search
  15. Colonnade Catering Corp. v. United
    Search
  16. court was convened. On December 30, 1976, it ruled in Mr. Barlow's favor. 424 F.Supp. 437. Concluding that Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  17. Court, 387 U. S. 523 , 387 U. S. 528 -529 (1967), and See v. Seattle
    Search
  18. U. S. 1 , 433 U. S. 7 -8 (1977). Page 436 U. S. 312 See also G. M. Leasing Corp. v. United
    Search
  19. searches are generally unreasonable, and that this rule applies to commercial premises as well as homes. In Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  20. See v. Seattle
    Search
  21. standards. It therefore appears that, unless some recognized exception to the warrant requirement applies, See v. Seattle
    Search
  22. Certain industries have such a history of government oversight that no reasonable expectation of privacy, see Katz v. United
    Search
  23. Almeida-Sanchez v. United
    Search
  24. a Colonnde-Biswell type exception by drawing analogies from the field of labor law. In Republic Aviation Corp. v. NLRB
    Search
  25. over the intrusion of nonemployee organizers, even in nonworking area of the plant and during nonworking hours. NLRB v. Babcock
    Search
  26. Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  27. Camara Page 436 U. S. 321 v. Municipal
    Search
  28. Cf. Air Pollution Variance Bd. v. Western
    Search
  29. both the car and the driver, and the more available opportunity for plain view observations of a car's contents. Cady v. Dombrowski
    Search
  30. Chambers v. Maroney
    Search
  31. of a search generally depends upon whether it was conducted pursuant to a valid warrant. See, e.g., Coolidge v. New
    Search
  32. first Clause even though the probable cause requirement of the Warrant Clause cannot be satisfied. See United States v. Martinez-Fuerte
    Search
  33. in the Warrant Clause. South Dakota v. Opperman
    Search
  34. lawful limits of the inspection, and to assure him that the person demanding entry is an authorized inspector. Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  35. signature. If the employer still has doubts, he may make a toll-free call to verify the inspector's authority, Usery v. Godfrey
    Search
  36. States, 413 U. S. 266 , 413 U. S. 290 (WHITE, J., dissenting). In United States v. Martinez-Fuerte
    Search
  37. Page 436 U. S. 336 G. M. Leasing Corp. v. United
    Search
  38. States, 429 U. S. 338 , 429 U. S. 353 . Thus, in Colonnade Catering Corp. v. United
    Search
  39. Id. at 397 U. S. 76 . And in United States v. Biswell
    Search
  40. even though those practices involved significantly more individual discretion than the OSHA program. See, e.g., Terry v. Ohio
    Search
  41. Adams v. Williams
    Search
  42. What the Court actually decided in Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  43. Court, 387 U. S. 523 , and See v. Seattle
    Search
  44. U.S. Supreme Court Marshall v. Barlow's
    Search
  45. and See v. Seattle
    Search
  46. G. M. Leasing Corp. v. United
    Search
  47. In Camara v. Municipal
    Search
  48. Katz v. United
    Search
  49. In Republic Aviation Corp. v. NLRB
    Search
  50. NLRB v. Babcock
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial