Us Supreme Court Court January 1998 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.
Allentown Mack Sales and Service, Inc. Vs. Nlrb
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-26-1998
Allentown Mack Sales & Service, Inc. v. NLRB - 522 U.S. 359 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus ALLENTOWN MACK SALES & SERVICE, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT No. 96-795. Argued October 15, 1997-Decided January 26, 1998 Mack Trucks, Inc., sold its Allentown, Pennsylvania, branch to petitioner Allentown Mack Sales & Service, Inc. Allentown thereafter operated as an independent dealership, employing 32 of the original 45 Mack employees. Although the Mack branch's service and parts employees had been represented by Local Lodge 724 of the machinists' union, a number of Mack employees suggested to the new owners, both before and immediately after the sale, that the union had lost their support or the support of bargaining-unit members generally. Allentown refused Local 724's request for recognition and for commencement of collectivebargaining negotiations, claiming a good-faith reasonable d...
Oubre Vs. Entergy Operations, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-26-1998
Oubre v. Entergy Operations, Inc. - 522 U.S. 422 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus OUBRE v. ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No.96-1291. Argued November 12, 1997-Decided January 26, 1998 In consideration for receipt of severance pay under an employment termination agreement, petitioner Oubre signed a release of all claims against her employer, respondent Entergy Operations, Inc. In procuring the release, Entergy failed to comply in at least three respects with the requirements for a release under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), as set forth in the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA): It did not (1) give Oubre enough time to consider her options, (2) give her seven days to change her mind, or (3) make specific reference to ADEA claims. Mter receiving her last severance payment, Oubre sued Entergy, alleging constructive discharge on the basis of her age in violation of the ADEA and state la...
Kawaauhau Vs. Geiger
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Kawaauhau v. Geiger - 523 U.S. 57 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus KAWAAUHAU ET VIR v. GEIGER CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 97-115. Argued January 21, 1998-Decided March 3,1998 When petitioner Kawaauhau sought treatment for her injured foot, respondent Dr. Geiger examined and hospitalized her to attend to the risk of infection. Although Geiger knew that intravenous penicillin would have been more effective, he prescribed oral penicillin, explaining in his testimony that he understood his patient wished to minimize treatment costs. Geiger then departed on a business trip, leaving Kawaauhau in the care of other physicians, who decided she should be transferred to an infectious disease specialist. When Geiger returned, he canceled the transfer and discontinued all antibiotics because he believed the infection had subsided. Kawaauhau's condition deteriorated, requiring amputation of her leg below the knee. Mter trial in the malpracti...
Lunding Vs. New York Tax Appeals Tribunal
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Lunding v. New York Tax Appeals Tribunal - 522 U.S. 287 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus L UNDING ET UX. v. NEW YORK TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK No. 96-1462. Argued November 5, 1997-Decided January 21, 1998 New York Tax Law 631(b)(6) effectively denies only nonresident taxpayers a state income tax deduction for alimony paid. Petitioners-a Connecticut couple required to pay higher taxes on their New York income when that State denied their attempted deduction of a pro rata portion of the alimony petitioner husband paid a previous spouse-exhausted their administrative remedies and commenced this action, asserting, among other things, that 631(b)(6) discriminates against New York nonresidents in violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause, U. S. Const., Art. IV, 2. The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court agreed and held 631(b)(6) to be unconstitutional, but the New York Court of Appeals reversed, holding that ...
Feltner Vs. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-21-1998
Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. - 523 U.S. 340 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus FELTNER v. COLUMBIA PICTURES TELEVISION, INC. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1768. Argued January 21, 1998-Decided March 31,1998 Respondent Columbia Pictures Television, Inc., terminated agreements licensing several television series to three television stations owned by petitioner Feltner after the stations' royalty payments became delinquent. When the stations continued to broadcast the programs, Columbia sued Feltner and others for, inter alia, copyright infringement. Columbia won partial summary judgment as to liability on its copyright infringement claims and then exercised the option afforded by 504(c) of the Copyright Act of 1976 (Act) to recover statutory damages in lieu of actual damages. The District Court denied Feltner's request for a jury trial, and awarded Columbia statutory damages following a bench trial. The Ninth Ci...
Cohen Vs. De La Cruz
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-20-1998
Cohen v. de la Cruz - 523 U.S. 213 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus COHEN V. DE LA CRUZ ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 96-1923. Argued January 20, 1998-Decided March 24,1998 Mter the local rent control administrator ordered petitioner to refund $31,382.50 in excessive rents he had charged respondent tenants, he sought to discharge his debts under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code (Code). The tenants filed an adversary proceeding, arguing that the debt owed to them was nondischargeable under 11 U. S. C. 523(a)(2)(A) of the Code, which excepts from discharge "any debt ... for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent obtained by ... actual fraud." They also sought treble damages, attorney's fees, and costs under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. The Bankruptcy Court ruled in their favor, finding that petitioner had committed "actual fraud" within the meaning of 523(a)(2)(A) an...
Rogers Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-14-1998
Rogers v. United States - 522 U.S. 252 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus ROGERS v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1279. Argued November 5, 1997-Decided January 14, 1998 Petitioner was charged with the knowing possession of an unregistered and unserialized firearm in violation of 26 U. S. C. 5861(d) and (i) as a result of the discovery of a silencer in his truck. A silencer is included within the meaning of "firearm" under 5845(a)(7). Petitioner repeatedly admitted during his arrest and trial that he knew that the item found in his truck was in fact a silencer. The District Court denied petitioner's request for an instruction that defined the Government's burden of establishing "knowing possession" as proof that he had willfully and consciously possessed an item he knew to be a "firearm." Petitioner was convicted. Under Staples v. United States, 511 U. S. 600 , decided after this case was submitted to the j...
Baker Vs. General Motors Corp.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-13-1998
Baker v. General Motors Corp. - 522 U.S. 222 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus BAKER ET AL. v. GENERAL MOTORS CORP. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 96-653. Argued October 15, 1997-Decided January 13, 1998 For 15 of the years Ronald Elwell worked for respondent General Motors Corporation (GM), he was assigned to a group that studied the performance of GM vehicles. Elwell's studies and research concentrated on vehicular fires, and he frequently aided GM lawyers defending against product liability actions. The Elwell-GM employment relationship soured in 1987, and Elwell agreed to retire after serving as a consultant for two years. Disagreement surfaced again when Elwell's retirement time neared and continued into 1991. That year, plaintiffs in a Georgia product liability action deposed Elwell. The Georgia case involved a GM pickup truck fuel tank that burst into flames just after a collision. Over GM's objection, Elwell testified that ...
Fidelity Financial Services, Inc. Vs. Fink
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-13-1998
Fidelity Financial Services, Inc. v. Fink - 522 U.S. 211 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus FIDELITY FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. v. FINK, TRUSTEE CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1370. Argued November 3, 1997-Decided January 13, 1998 Diane Beasley purchased a new car and gave petitioner, Fidelity Financial Services, Inc., a promissory note for the purchase price, secured by the car. Twenty-one days later, Fidelity mailed the application necessary to perfect its security interest under Missouri law. Beasley later filed for bankruptcy, and the trustee of her bankruptcy estate, respondent Fink, moved to set aside Fidelity's security interest on the ground that the lien was a voidable preference under 11 U. S. C. § 547(b). Section 547(c)(3)(B) prohibits the avoidance of a security interest for a loan used to acquire property if, among other things, the security interest is "perfected on or before 20 days after the debtor receive...
New Jersey Vs. New York
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-12-1998
New Jersey v. New York - 523 U.S. 767 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus NEW JERSEY v. NEW YORK ON EXCEPTIONS TO REPORT OF SPECIAL MASTER No. 120, Orig. Argued January 12, 1998-Decided May 26,1998 An 1834 compact (hereinafter Compact) between New York and New Jersey, approved by Congress pursuant to the Compact Clause, set the boundary line between the States as the middle of the Hudson River, Article First; provided that Ellis Island, then three acres, was part of New York, despite its location on the New Jersey side of the river, Article Second; and provided that New York had exclusive jurisdiction of submerged lands and waters between the two States to the low-water mark on the New Jersey shore, subject to certain exceptions, including New Jersey's right to submerged lands on its side of the boundary, Article Third. The States agree that Article Second gave New York sovereign authority over the Island, and this Court has determined, inter alia, that New Jersey has retained...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »