Us Supreme Court Court May 1986 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.
LA. Pub. Svc. Comm'n Vs. FCC
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1986
La. Pub. Svc. Comm'n v. FCC - 476 U.S. 355 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court La. Pub. Svc. Comm'n v. FCC, 476 U.S. 355 (1986) Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Communications Commission No. 84-871. Argued January 13, 1986 Decided May 27, 1986 * 476 U.S. 355 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The Communications Act of 1934 (Act) grants to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) broad authority to develop and regulate "interstate and foreign commerce in wire and radio communication," 47 U.S.C. 151, but also provides that "nothing in this chapter shall be construed to apply or to give the Commission jurisdiction with respect to (1) charges, classifications, practices, services, facilities, or regulations for or in connection with intrastate communication service," 152(b). In 1980 and 1981, the FCC issued orders changing its prior rules concerning practices for depreciating telephone plant and equipment. Subsequently, upo...
Public Service Comm'N vs. C. and P. Tel. Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1986
PUBLIC SERVICE COMM'N v. C. & P. TEL. CO. - 476 U.S. 445 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court PUBLIC SERVICE COMM'N v. C. & P. TEL. CO., 476 U.S. 445 (1986) 476 U.S. 445 PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE COMPANY OF MARYLAND CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 84-1362. Argued January 13, 1986 Decided May 27, 1986 748 F.2d 879 , vacated and remanded. Kirk J. Emge argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioner. Jack D. Smith argued the cause for the Federal Communications Commission as amicus curiae urging reversal. With him on the brief were Acting Solicitor General Fried, Deputy Solicitor General Wallace, Christopher J. Wright, Daniel M. Armstrong, and Jane E. Mago. D. Michael Stroud argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were J. William Sarver, Mark J. Mathis, and Daniel I. Prywes. * PER CURIAM. We vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and rema...
Square D Co. Vs. Niagara Frontier
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1986
Square D Co. v. Niagara Frontier - 476 U.S. 409 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Square D Co. v. Niagara Frontier, 476 U.S. 409 (1986) Square D Co. v. Niagara Frontier Tariff Bureau, Inc. No. 85-21 Argued March 3, 1986 Decided May 27, 1986 476 U.S. 409 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus Petitioner shippers brought class actions in Federal District Court against respondent motor carriers and respondent ratemaking bureau, alleging that, during the years 1966 through 1981, respondents engaged in a conspiracy, in violation of the Sherman Act, to fix rates for transporting freight between the United States and Canada without complying with an agreement filed by the bureau with, and approved by, the Interstate Commerce Commission. Petitioners sought treble damages, measured by the difference between the allegedly higher rates they paid and the rates they would have paid in a freely competitive market, and also sought declaratory and injuncti...
ila Vs. Davis
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1986
ILA v. Davis - 476 U.S. 380 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court ILA v. Davis, 476 U.S. 380 (1986) International Longshoremen's Association, AFL-CIO v. Davis No. 85-217 Argued February 25, 1986 Decided May 27, 1986 476 U.S. 380 APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA Syllabus Appellee was formerly employed as a ship superintendent for a stevedoring company. When he, with others, attempted to organize the company's ship superintendents and to affiliate with appellant Union, a union official allegedly assured them that the Union would get them their jobs back if they were discharged for participating in union-related activities. After he was discharged apparently because of such activities, appellee filed a suit against appellant in an Alabama Circuit Court, alleging fraud and misrepresentation under an Alabama statute. The case proceeded to trial, and a jury entered a verdict in appellee's favor. Throughout the trial, appellant defended the suit on the merits, and not until its motion ...
Fdic Vs. Philadelphia Gear Corp.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-27-1986
FDIC v. Philadelphia Gear Corp. - 476 U.S. 426 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court FDIC v. Philadelphia Gear Corp., 476 U.S. 426 (1986) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Philadelphia Gear Corp. No. 84-1972 Argued March 4, 1986 Decided May 27, 1986 476 U.S. 426 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Syllabus On the application of a customer of respondent, a bank issued a standby letter of credit for respondent's benefit in the amount of $145,200. The letter of credit provided that a draft drawn upon it would be honored by the bank only if accompanied by respondent's signed statement that the customer had failed to make payment for invoiced goods. On the same day that the letter of credit was issued, the customer executed an unsecured promissory note in the bank's favor. The customer and the bank understood the liability on the note to be contingent on respondent's presenting drafts on the letter of credit after the customer's nonpayment. Subseque...
California Vs. Ciraolo
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-19-1986
California v. Ciraolo - 476 U.S. 207 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986) California v. Ciraolo No. 84-1513 Argued December 10, 1985 Decided May 19, 1986 476 U.S. 207 CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT Syllabus The Santa Clara, Cal., police received an anonymous telephone tip that marijuana was growing in respondent's backyard, which was enclosed by two fences and shielded from view at ground level. Officers who were trained in marijuana identification secured a private airplane, flew over respondent's house at an altitude of 1,000 feet, and readily identified marijuana plants growing in the yard. A search warrant was later obtained on the basis of one of the officer's naked-eye observations; a photograph of the surrounding area taken from the airplane was attached as an exhibit. The warrant was executed, and marijuana plants were seized. After the California trial court denied respondent's motion to sup...
Wygant Vs. Jackson Bd. of Educ.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-19-1986
Wygant v. Jackson Bd. of Educ. - 476 U.S. 267 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Wygant v. Jackson Bd. of Educ., 476 U.S. 267 (1986) Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education No. 84-1340 Argued November 6, 1985 Decided May 19, 1986 476 U.S. 267 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The collective bargaining agreement between respondent Board of Education (Board) and a teachers' union provided that, if it became necessary to lay off teachers, those with the most seniority would be retained, except that at no time would there be a greater percentage of minority personnel laid off than the current percentage of minority personnel employed at the time of the layoff. After this layoff provision was upheld in litigation arising from the Board's noncompliance with the provision, the Board adhered to it, with the result that, during certain school years, nonminority teachers were laid off, while minority teachers with less seniority were retained. Petiti...
Brock Vs. Pierce County
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-19-1986
Brock v. Pierce County - 476 U.S. 253 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Brock v. Pierce County, 476 U.S. 253 (1986) Brock v. Pierce County No. 85-385 Argued April 1, 1986 Decided May 19, 1986 476 U.S. 253 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus During the time pertinent to this case, the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) (later repealed) required that qualified entities (such as respondent county), receiving federal grants for programs providing job training and employment opportunities for economically disadvantaged, unemployed, or underemployed persons, comply with the statute and the regulations of the Secretary of Labor (Secretary). Section 106(b) of CETA provided that the Secretary shall investigate whenever he has reason to believe, through a complaint, an audit, or otherwise, that a grant recipient was misusing CETA funds, and further provided that the Secretary "shall" determine "the truth of the allegation or belief in...
Dow Chemical Co. Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-19-1986
Dow Chemical Co. v. United States - 476 U.S. 227 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986) Dow Chemical Co. v. United States No. 84-1259 Argued December 10, 1985 Decided May 19, 1986 476 U.S. 227 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Petitioner operates a 2,000-acre chemical plant consisting of numerous covered buildings, with outdoor manufacturing equipment and piping conduits located between the various buildings exposed to visual observation from the air. Petitioner maintains elaborate security around the perimeter of the complex, barring ground-level public views of the area. When petitioner denied a request by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for an on-site inspection of the plant, EPA did not seek an administrative search warrant, but instead employed a commercial aerial photographer, using a standard precision aerial mapping camera, to take photographs of the facility from vario...
Bowen Vs. Owens
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-19-1986
Bowen v. Owens - 476 U.S. 340 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Bowen v. Owens, 476 U.S. 340 (1986) Bowen v. Owens No. 84-1905 Argued February 26, 1986 Decided May 19, 1986 476 U.S. 340 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Syllabus Certain provisions of the Social Security Act in effect between 1979 and 1983 authorized payment of survivor's benefits to a wage-earner's widowed spouse who remarried after age 60, but not to a similarly situated divorced widowed spouse. After being administratively denied survivor's benefits under these provisions because she had remarried, appellee divorced widow filed a class action in Federal District Court, challenging the constitutionality of the provisions. The court upheld the challenge, reasoning that, because Congress in 1977 had chosen to treat surviving divorced spouses and widowed spouses in the same manner upon the wage-earner's death, there was no logical basis for distinguishing between the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »