Us Supreme Court Court May 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.
Montana Vs. Crow Tribe
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-18-1998
Montana v. Crow Tribe - 523 U.S. 696 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus MONTANA ET AL. v. CROW TRIBE OF INDIANS ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1829. Argued February 24, 1998-Decided May 18, 1998 In 1904, the Crow Tribe ceded part of its Montana Reservation to the United States for settlement by non-Indians. The United States holds rights to minerals underlying the ceded strip in trust for the Tribe. In 1972, with the approval of the Department of the Interior and pursuant to the Indian Mineral Leasing Act of 1938 (IMLA), Westmoreland Resources, Inc., a non-Indian company, entered into a mining lease with the Tribe for coal underlying the ceded strip. Mter executing the lease, Westmoreland signed contracts with its customers, four utility companies, allowing it to pass on to the utilities the cost of valid taxes. Westmoreland and the Tribe renegotiated the lease in 1974. The amended lease had an extendable ten-year term, and...
Arkansas Ed. Television Comm'n Vs. Forbes
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-18-1998
Arkansas Ed. Television Comm'n v. Forbes - 523 U.S. 666 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION v. FORBES CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 96-779. Argued October 8, 1997-Decided May 18, 1998 Petitioner Arkansas Educational Television Commission (AETC), a stateowned public television broadcaster, sponsored a debate between the major party candidates for the 1992 election in Arkansas' Third Congressional District. When AETC denied the request of respondent Forbes, an independent candidate with little popular support, for permission to participate in the debate, Forbes filed this suit, claiming, inter alia, that he was entitled to participate under the First Amendment. The jury made express findings that Forbes' exclusion had not been influenced by political pressure or disagreement with his views. The District Court entered judgment for AETC. The Eighth Circuit reversed, holding that the debate wa...
Ohio Forestry Assn., Inc. Vs. Sierra Club
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-18-1998
Ohio Forestry Assn., Inc. v. Sierra Club - 523 U.S. 726 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus OHIO FORESTRY ASSOCIATION, INC. v. SIERRA CLUB ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT No. 97-16. Argued February 25, 1998-Decided May 18, 1998 Pursuant to the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA), the United States Forest Service developed a Land and Resource Management Plan (Plan) for Ohio's Wayne National Forest. Although the Plan makes logging in the forest more likely-it sets logging goals, selects the areas suited to timber production, and determines which probable methods of timber harvest are appropriate-it does not itself authorize the cutting of any trees. Before the Service can permit logging, the NFMA and applicable regulations require it to: (a) propose a particular site and specific harvesting method, (b) ensure that the project is consistent with the Plan, (c) provide affected parties with notice and an opportunity to be heard...
Stewart Vs. Martinez-villareal
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-18-1998
Stewart v. Martinez-Villareal - 523 U.S. 637 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus STEWART, DIRECTOR, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, ET AL. V. MARTINEZ-VILLAREAL CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 97-300. Argued February 25, 1998-Decided May 18, 1998 Respondent was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. His direct appeals and habeas petitions in the Arizona state courts were unsuccessful, and his first three federal habeas petitions were denied on the ground that he had not exhausted his state remedies. In his fourth federal habeas petition, he claimed, inter alia, that he was incompetent to be executed under Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U. S. 399 . The District Court dismissed that claim as premature, but granted the writ on other grounds. In reversing the granting of the writ, the Ninth Circuit explained that its ruling was not intended to affect later litigation of the Ford claim. On remand, respondent moved to re...
Bousley Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-18-1998
Bousley v. United States - 523 U.S. 614 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus BOUSLEY v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 96-8516. Argued March 3, 1998-Decided May 18, 1998 Petitioner pleaded guilty to drug possession with intent to distribute, 21 U. S. C. 841(a)(1), and to "using" a firearm "during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime," 18 U. S. C. 924(c)(1), but reserved the right to challenge the quantity of drugs used in calculating his sentence. He appealed his sentence, but did not challenge the plea's validity. The Eighth Circuit affirmed. Subsequently, he sought habeas relief, claiming his guilty plea lacked a factual basis because neither the "evidence" nor the "plea allocation" showed a connection between the firearms in the bedroom of the house and the garage where the drug trafficking occurred. The District Court dismissed the petition on the ground that a factual basis for the plea existed because the ...
Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engine Div., Avco Corp. Vs. Automobile ...
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: May-18-1998
Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engine Div., AVCO Corp. v. Automobile Workers - 523 U.S. 653 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus TEXTRON LYCOMING RECIPROCATING ENGINE DIVISION, AVCO CORP. v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 97-463. Argued February 23, 1998-Decided May 18, 1998 Petitioner Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engine Division (Textron) and respondents-an international union and one of its locals (hereinafter Union), which represented approximately 500 Textron employees-were parties to a collective-bargaining agreement that prohibited the Union from striking for any reason and required Textron to notify the Union before entering into any agreement to "subcontract out" work that would otherwise be performed by Union members. Mter Textron announced plans to subcontract out enough work to cause roughly onehalf of the Union members to lose their jobs, t...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›