Us Supreme Court Court June 1981 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Haig Vs. Agee
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-29-1981
Haig v. Agee - 453 U.S. 280 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Haig v. Agee, 453 U.S. 280 (1981) Haig v. Agee No. 883 Argued January 14, 1981 Decided June 29, 1981 453 U.S. 280 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Syllabus Respondent, an American citizen and a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency, announced a campaign "to expose CIA officers and agents and to take the measures necessary to drive them out of the countries where they are operating." He then engaged in activities abroad that have resulted in identifications of alleged undercover CIA agents and intelligence sources in foreign countries. Because of these activities the Secretary of State revoked respondent's passport, explaining that the revocation was based on a regulation authorizing revocation of a passport where the Secretary determines that an American citizen's activities abroad "are causing or are likely to cause serious damage to the national security...
California Vs. Prysock
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-29-1981
California v. Prysock - 453 U.S. 355 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court California v. Prysock, 453 U.S. 355 (1981) California v. Prysock No. 80-1846 Decided June 29, 1981 453 U.S. 355 ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Syllabus Held: There is no rigid rule requiring that the content of the warnings to an accused prior to police interrogation required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 , be a virtual incantation of the precise language contained in the Miranda opinion. Thus, the California Court of Appeal erred in holding that Miranda warnings were inadequate simply because of the order in which they were given to respondent (a minor), where, after he was told that he had "the right to talk to a lawyer before you are questioned, have him present with you while you are being questioned, and all during the questioning," he was informed that he had the right to have his parents present, and then was informed that he...
Nlrb Vs. Amax Coal Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-29-1981
NLRB v. Amax Coal Co. - 453 U.S. 322 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court NLRB v. Amax Coal Co., 453 U.S. 322 (1981) National Labor Relations Board v. Amax Coal Co. No. 8092 Argued April 28, 1981 Decided June 29, 1981 * 453 U.S. 322 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus Amax Coal Co. owns several deep-shaft coal mines in the Midwest, with respect to which it is a member of the Bituminous Coal Operators Association (BCOA), a national multiemployer group that bargains with the union representing Amax's employees. Under a collective bargaining contract with the union, Amax, along with other members of the BCOA, agreed to contribute to the union's national pension and welfare trust funds, which were established under 302(c)(5) of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA). In accord with 302(c)(5)(B), the trust funds are administered by three trustees, one selected by the union, one by members of the BCOA, and one by the other two. When Amax ope...
Jeffries Vs. Barksdale
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-29-1981
Jeffries v. Barksdale - 453 U.S. 914 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Jeffries v. Barksdale, 453 U.S. 914 (1981) Jeffries v. Barksdale No. 80-6620 Decided June 29, 1981 453 U.S. 914 ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. JUSTICE REHNQUIST, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE and JUSTICE POWELL join, dissenting. If this case were properly before the Court, I would have no difficulty in joining my Brethren in denying the petition for writ of certiorari. It is clear to me, however, that, under the applicable statutes, we have no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Accordingly, I would dismiss for want of jurisdiction. The facts need be only briefly stated. Petitioner was convicted in state court. He succeeded in obtaining a reversal of his conviction on appeal, and a retrial was ordered. After several continuances were granted, petitioner sought habeas corpus relief in Federal Distri...
California Med. Assn. Vs. Fec
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-26-1981
California Med. Assn. v. FEC - 453 U.S. 182 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court California Med. Assn. v. FEC, 453 U.S. 182 (1981) California Medical Association v. Federal Elections Commission No. 79-1952 Argued January 19, 1981 Decided June 26, 1981 453 U.S. 182 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus One provision of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (Act), 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1)(C), prohibits individuals and unincorporated associations from contributing more than $5,000 per calendar year to any multicandidate political committee. A related provision, 441a(f), makes it unlawful for political committees knowingly to accept contributions exceeding the $5,000 limit. Appellant California Medical Association (CMA) is a not-for-profit unincorporated association of doctors, and appellant California Medical Political Action Committee (CALPAC) is a political committee formed by CMA and registered with appellee Federal Election Commission (FEC). W...
Lehman Vs. Nakshian
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-26-1981
Lehman v. Nakshian - 453 U.S. 156 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Lehman v. Nakshian, 453 U.S. 156 (1981) Lehman v. Nakshian No. 80-242 Argued March 31, 1981 Decided June 26, 1981 453 U.S. 156 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Syllabus The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA or Act) was amended in 1974 to extend to federal employees the Act's protection of older workers against discrimination in the workplace based on age. Section 15(c) of the Act provides that any aggrieved federal employee "may bring a civil action in any Federal district court of competent jurisdiction for such legal or equitable relief as will effectuate the purposes" of the Act. Respondent federal employee brought suit in Federal District Court against the Secretary of the Navy under 15(c), alleging violations of the Act and demanding a jury trial. The District Court ruled, over the Secretary's objection, that respondent was entitled to a ju...
City of Newport Vs. Fact Concerts, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-26-1981
City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc. - 453 U.S. 247 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc., 453 U.S. 247 (1981) City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc. No. 8396 Argued March 31, 1981 Decided June 26, 1981 453 U.S. 247 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT Syllabus Respondents (an organization licensed by petitioner city to present certain musical concerts, and a promoter of the concerts) brought suit in Federal District Court against the city and city officials. Alleging, inter alia, that the city's cancellation of the license amounted to a violation of their constitutional rights under color of.state law, respondents sought compensatory and punitive damages under 42 U.S.C. 183. Without objection, the court gave an instruction authorizing the jury to award punitive damages against each defendant, including the city. Verdicts were returned for respondents, which in addition to awarding compensatory damages, also ...
Mccarty Vs. Mccarty
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-26-1981
McCarty v. McCarty - 453 U.S. 210 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court McCarty v. McCarty, 453 U.S. 210 (1981) McCarty v. McCarty No. 80-5 Argued March 2, 1981 Decided June 26, 1981 453 U.S. 210 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT Syllabus A regular commissioned officer of the United States Army who retires after 20 years of service is entitled to retired pay. Retired pay terminates with the officer's death, although he may designate a beneficiary to receive any arrearages that remain unpaid at death. In addition, there are statutory plans that allow the officer to set aside a portion of his retired pay for his survivors. Appellant, a Regular Army Colonel, filed a petition in California Superior Court for dissolution of his marriage to appellee. At the time, he had served approximately 18 of the 20 years required for retirement with pay. Under California law, each spouse, upon dissolution of a marriage, has an equal and absolute right to a half inte...
Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. Vs. Sea Clammers
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-25-1981
Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. v. Sea Clammers - 453 U.S. 1 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. v. Sea Clammers, 453 U.S. 1 (1981) Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Association No. 79-1711 Argued February 24, 1981 Decided June 25, 1981 * 453 U.S. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus Respondents (an organization whose members harvest fish and shellfish off the coast of New York and New Jersey and one individual member) brought suit in Federal District Court against petitioners (various governmental entities and officials from New York, New Jersey, and the Federal Government), alleging damage to fishing grounds caused by discharges and ocean dumping of sewage and other waste. Invoking a number of legal theories, respondents sought injunctive and declaratory relief and compensatory and punitive damages. The District Court granted summary judgment for petitioners. It rejected respon...
Rostker Vs. Goldberg
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jun-25-1981
Rostker v. Goldberg - 453 U.S. 57 (1981) U.S. Supreme Court Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981) Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981) No. 80-251 Argued March 24, 1981 -- Decided June 25, 1981 453 U.S. 57 APPEAL FROM TIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Syllabus The Military Selective Service Act (Act) authorizes the President to require the registration for possible military service of males, but not females, the purpose of registration being to facilitate any eventual conscription under the Act. Registration for the draft was discontinued by Presidential Proclamation in 1975 (the Act was amended in 1973 to preclude conscription), but as the result of a crisis in Southwestern Asia, President Carter decided in 1980 that it was necessary to reactivate the registration process, and sought Congress' allocation of funds for that purpose. He also recommended that Congress amend the Act to permit the registration and conscription of women ...