Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-22-1973
..... the middle district of florida, which we here review, was based on the assumption that the language in 1(14)(a) of the interstate commerce act requiring rulemaking under that section to be done "after hearing" was the equivalent of a statutory requirement that the rule "be made on the record after opportunity for an agency ..... requirement of a 'full hearing' has obvious reference to the tradition of judicial proceedings. . . ." id. at 298 u. s. 480 . section 1(14)(a) of the interstate commerce act bestows upon the commission broad discretionary power to determine incentive rates. these rates may have devastating effects on a particular line. according to the brief of ..... reached the same conclusion by a somewhat different line of reasoning. that court felt that, because 1(14)(a) of the interstate commerce act had required a "hearing," and because that section was originally enacted in 1917, congress was probably thinking in terms of a "hearing" such as that described in the opinion of this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-22-1973
..... interest' is made both to delimit more narrowly the exception and to give it a more precise definition. the phrase 'public interest' in section 3(a) of the administrative procedure act has been subject page 410 u. s. 82 to conflicting interpretations, often colored by personal prejudices and predilections. it admits of no clear ..... [t]his official information or material, referred to as classified information or material in this order, is expressly exempted from public disclosure by section 552(b)(1) of [the freedom of information act]." (emphasis added.) thus, the executive clearly recognized that exemption 1 applies only to matter specifically classified "in the interest of the national ..... , but nonetheless under the umbrella of a "secret" file, the district court should make sure that it is disclosed under the act. this seems clear from 552(b), which states: "this section does not apply to matters that are -- (1) specifically required by executive order to be kept secret in the interest of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-22-1973
..... , from participating in the abortion procedure. these provisions obviously are in the statute in order to afford appropriate protection to the individual and to the denominational hospital. section 21202(e) affords adequate protection to the hospital, and little more is provided by the committee prescribed by 26-1202(b)(5). we conclude that the interposition ..... p. 410 u. s. 113 , at 140 n. 37. [ footnote 4 ] the pertinent provisions of the 1876 statute were: "section i. be it enacted, etc., that from and after the passage of this act, the willful killing of an unborn child, so far developed as to be ordinarily called 'quick,' by any injury to the mother of such ..... child, which would be murder if it resulted in the death of such mother, shall be guilty of a felony, and punishable by death or imprisonment for life, as the jury trying the case may recommend." "sec .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-21-1973
..... virginia constitution now allows for the first time special or local legislation for counties as well as for cities. revised constitution of virginia, article vii, section 2. those provisions now permit counties the constitutional flexibility formerly afforded only to cities in providing services for their citizens." brief for appellant commonwealth of virginia ..... virginia 117 (1969): "there is no reason to make any distinction between general assembly and congressional apportionment. for this reason, the proposed section [art. ii, 6] combines the provisions of sections 43 and 55 so that a common set of principles applies to apportionment of legislative seats and congressional seats." [ footnote 2/10 ] ..... immediately and not be subject to the limitations contained in article iv, section 13, of this constitution." [ footnote 2 ] va.code. ann. 24.1-12.1 (supp. 1972). [ footnote 3 ] va.code ann. 24.1-14.1, as amended by c. 246, acts of assembly, june 14, 1971. [ footnote 4 ] the reapportionment .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-21-1973
..... aaron liberty." " * * * *" "6th, the trial of the defendant was not in accord with fundamental fairness guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment of the constitution of the united states and article three, sections fourteen and twenty-six of the constitution of the state of mississippi." it would have to be an extraordinarily perceptive trial judge who could glean from this motion that the ..... the first time on appeal is not without exceptions, among which are errors 'affecting fundamental rights of the parties . . . or affecting page 410 u. s. 305 public policy,' . . . if to act on which will work no injustice to any party to the appeal." id. at 528, 21 so.2d at 404. the court proceeded to consider the issue. in brooks v .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-21-1973
..... a different treatment within a constitutional framework. we note that the granting of good time credit toward parole eligibility takes into account a prisoner's rehabilitative performance. section 230(2) of the new york correction law authorizes such credit toward the minimum parole date "for good conduct and efficient and willing performance of duties assigned ..... have absolutely nothing. some have a little something." tr. of oral arg. 6. [ footnote 18 ] see n 1, supra. [ footnote 19 ] appellants further note that: "section 260.3 sets forth the criteria for awarding allowances and states: " " (b) in evaluating the amount of allowance to be granted, the statutory criteria ( i.e., good behavior ..... stand as the reduction allowed, unless withheld wholly or partly by the board as punishment, as above provided." moreover, under 230(4) of the act, jail time is not excluded from the computation of a prisoner's maximum good time allowance from the maximum term of an indeterminate sentence. that is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-22-1973
..... united states v. green, 350 u. s. 415 , 350 u. s. 417 ; united states v. kemble, 198 f.2d 889. [ footnote 6 ] section 2 of the act provided: "any person who, in connection with or in relation to any act in any way or in any degree affecting trade or commerce or any article or commodity moving or about to move in trade ..... physical violence or physical injury to a person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to violate sections (a) or (b); or" "(d) conspires or acts concertedly with any other person or persons to commit any of the foregoing acts; shall, upon conviction thereof, be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment from one to ten ..... to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both." "extortion" is defined in the act, as "the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-22-1973
..... of a common carrier upon power companies owning lines capable of the wholesale transmission of electricity. such a provision was originally included in the bill. one proposed section provided that: "it shall be the duty of every public utility to furnish energy to, exchange energy with, and transmit energy for any person upon reasonable ..... would have specifically provided the commission with authority to order wheeling. in the 91st congress, bills to establish an electric power reliability act were again introduced. section 3 of that proposed act included a grant of authority for the fpc to order wheeling, see, e.g., s. 1071, 91st cong., 1st sess. yet another ..... bill, h.r. 12585, 91st cong., 1st sess., included a very broad provision establishing open access to transmission networks at reasonable rates. the proposed electric power reliability act .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-27-1973
..... , except to the extent that the facilities of such establishment are made available to the customers or patrons of an establishment within the scope of subsection (b) of this section. 42 u.s.c. 2000a(e). [ footnote 9 ] apparently one applicant was formally rejected during the preceding 12 years of little hunting park's operation. app. ..... as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other." [ footnote 11 ] the act of apr. 9, 1866, 1, read in part: "that all persons born in the united states . . . of every race and color . . . shall have the same right, ..... members of wheaton-haven, whose negro guest was refused admission to the pool for racial reasons; and the guest -- brought suit for declaratory and injunctive relief under the civil rights acts of 1866, 1870, and 1964, 42 u.s.c. 1982, 1981, and 2000a et seq. the district court granted respondents' motion for summary judgment. the court of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Feb-27-1973
..... permanente] for medical services to be provided by [permanente] hereunder, [kaiser] shall pay to [permanente] the amounts specified in this article h." " * * * *" " section h-4. provision for savings and retirement program for physicians. " "in the event that [permanente] establishes a savings and retirement plan or other deferred compensation plan approved by [ ..... for a close comparison of the present differences, see grayck, tax qualified retirement plans for professional practitioners: a comparison of the self-employed individuals tax requirement act of 1962 and the professional association, 63 col.l.rev. 415 (1963); note, federal tax policy and retirement benefits -- a new approach, 59 ..... establishing the contemplated page 410 u. s. 444 plan soon was executed by permanente, kaiser, and the bank of america trust and savings association, acting as trustee. under this agreement, kaiser agreed to make payments to the trust at a predetermined rate, initially pegged at 12 cents per health plan .....
Tag this Judgment!