Us Supreme Court Court April 2001 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.
C and L Enterprises, Inc. Vs. Citizen Band Potawatomi Tribe of OklA.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
C & L Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Tribe of Okla. - 532 U.S. 411 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus C & L ENTERPRISES, INC. v. CITIZEN BAND POTAWATOMI INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF OKLAHOMA No. 00-292. Argued March 19, 200l-Decided April 30, 2001 Respondent, a federally recognized Indian Tribe, proposed and entered into a standard form construction contract with petitioner C & L Enterprises, Inc. (C & L), for the installation of a roof on a Tribe-owned commercial building in Oklahoma. The property in question lies outside the Tribe's reservation and is not held by the Federal Government in trust for the Tribe. The contract contains two key provisions. First, a clause provides that "[a]ll ... disputes ... arising out of ... the Contract ... shall be decided by arbitration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association .... The award rendered by the arbitrator ... shall ...
Daniels Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-25-2001
Daniels v. United States - 532 U.S. 374 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus DANIELS v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 99-9136. Argued January 8, 200l-Decided April 25, 2001 Petitioner was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U. S. C. 922(g)(1), and his sentence was enhanced under the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984 (ACCA), 18 U. S. C. 924(e), which imposes a mandatory minimum sentence on anyone who violates 922(g)(1) and has three previous convictions for, inter alia, a violent felony. Petitioner had four such prior state convictions. Mter an unsuccessful direct appeal, petitioner filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his federal sentence pursuant to 28 U. S. C. 2255. He asserted that his sentence violated the Constitution because it was based in part on two prior convictions that were themselves unconstitutional. Both prior convictions, he claimed, were based on inad...
Lackawanna County District Attorney Vs. Coss
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-25-2001
Lackawanna County District Attorney v. Coss - 532 U.S. 394 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus LACKAWANNA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY ET AL. V. COSS CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 99-1884. Argued February 20, 200l-Decided April 25, 2001 In 1986, respondent Coss was convicted in Pennsylvania state court of simple assault, institutional vandalism, and criminal mischief. Coss filed a petition for state postconviction relief with respect to these convictions, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, but the Pennsylvania courts have never ruled on the petition. In 1990, after Coss had served the full sentences for his 1986 convictions, he was convicted in state court of aggravated assault. He successfully challenged his 6 to 12 year sentence on direct appeal. On remand, the court did not consider Coss' 1986 convictions in determining his eligible sentencing range. In choosing a sentence within the applicable range, the court considered sever...
Atwater Vs. Lago Vista
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-24-2001
Atwater v. Lago Vista - 532 U.S. 318 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus ATWATER ET AL. v. CITY OF LAGO VISTA ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1408. Argued December 4, 2000-Decided April 24, 2001 Texas law makes it a misdemeanor, punishable only by a fine, either for a front-seat passenger in a car equipped with safety belts not to wear one or for the driver to fail to secure any small child riding in front. The warrantless arrest of anyone violating these provisions is expressly authorized by statute, but the police may issue citations in lieu of arrest. Petitioner Atwater drove her truck in Lago Vista, Texas, with her small children in the front seat. None of them was wearing a seatbelt. Respondent Turek, then a Lago Vista policeman, observed the seatbelt violations, pulled Atwater over, verbally berated her, handcuffed her, placed her in his squad car, and drove her to the local police station, where she was made to remove ...
Alexander Vs. Sandoval
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-24-2001
Alexander v. Sandoval - 532 U.S. 275 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus ALEXANDER, DIRECTOR, ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, ET AL. v. SANDOVAL, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1908. Argued January 16, 200l-Decided April 24, 2001 As a recipient of federal financial assistance, the Alabama Department of Public Safety (Department), of which petitioner Alexander is the director, is subject to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 601 of that title prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in covered programs and activities. Section 602 authorizes federal agencies to effectuate 601 by issuing regulations, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) in an exercise of this authority promulgated a regulation forbidding funding recipients to utilize criteria or administrative methods having the effect of subjecting individuals to discr...
Clark County School Dist. Vs. Breeden
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-23-2001
Clark County School Dist. v. Breeden - 532 U.S. 268 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT v. BREEDEN ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 00-866. Decided April 23, 2001 At a meeting with respondent and a male employee to review job applicants' psychological evaluation reports, respondent's male supervisor read aloud a sexually explicit remark that one applicant had made to a co-worker, looked at respondent, and stated, "I don't know what that means." The other employee replied, "Well, I'll tell you later," and both men chuckled. Respondent complained about the comment to the offending supervisor and other officials of their employer, petitioner Clark County School District. Pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, she subsequently filed a 42 U. S. C. 2000e-3(a) retaliation claim against petitioner, asserting that she was punished for these complaints and also for filing charg...
Easley Vs. Cromartie
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-18-2001
Easley v. Cromartie - 532 U.S. 234 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus EASLEY,* GOVERNOR OF NORTH CAROLINA, ET AL. v. CROMARTIE ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA No. 99-1864. Argued November 27, 2000-Decided April 18, 2001 t Mter this Court found that North Carolina's Legislature violated the Constitution by using race as the predominant factor in drawing its Twelfth Congressional District's 1992 boundaries, Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U. S. 899 , the State redrew those boundaries. A three-judge District Court subsequently granted appellees summary judgment, finding that the new 1997 boundaries had also been created with racial considerations dominating all others. This Court reversed, finding that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the evidence was consistent with a race-based objective or the constitutional political objective of creating a safe Democratic seat. Hunt v. Cromartie, 526 U. S. 541....
Shaw Vs. Murphy
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-18-2001
Shaw v. Murphy - 532 U.S. 223 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus SHAW ETAL. v. MURPHY CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1613. Argued January 16, 200l-Decided April 18, 2001 While respondent Murphy was incarcerated in state prison, he learned that a fellow inmate had been charged with assaulting a correctional officer. Murphy decided to assist the inmate with his defense and sent him a letter, which was intercepted in accordance with prison policy. Based on the letter's content, the prison sanctioned Murphy for violating prison rules prohibiting insolence and interfering with due process hearings. Murphy then sought declaratory and injunctive relief under 42 U. S. C. 1983, alleging that the disciplinary action violated, inter alia, his First Amendment rights, including the right to provide legal assistance to other inmates. In granting petitioners summary judgment, the District Court applied the decision in Turner v. Safley, 482...
United States Vs. Cleveland Indians Baseball Co.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-17-2001
United States v. Cleveland Indians Baseball Co. - 532 U.S. 200 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus UNITED STATES v. CLEVELAND INDIANS BASEBALL CO. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT No. 00-203. Argued February 27, 200l-Decided April 17, 2001 Under a grievance settlement agreement, respondent Cleveland Indians Baseball Company (Company) owed 8 players backpay for wages due in 1986 and 14 players backpay for wages due in 1987. The Company paid the back wages in 1994. This case presents the question whether, under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), the back wages should be taxed by reference to the year they were actually paid (1994) or, instead, by reference to the years they should have been paid (1986 and 1987). Both tax rates and the amount of the wages subject to tax (the wage base) have risen over time. Consequently, allocating the 1994 payments back to 1986 and 1987 would generate n...
Lujan Vs. G and G Fire Sprinklers, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-17-2001
Lujan v. G & G Fire Sprinklers, Inc. - 532 U.S. 189 (2001) OCTOBER TERM, 2000 Syllabus LUJAN, LABOR COMMISSIONER OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL. V. G & G FIRE SPRINKLERS, INC. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 00-152. Argued February 26, 200l-Decided April 17, 2001 The California Labor Code (Code) authorizes the State to order withholding of payments due a contractor on a public works project if a subcontractor on the project fails to comply with certain Code requirements; permits the contractor, in turn, to withhold similar sums from the subcontractor; and permits the contractor, or his assignee, to sue the awarding body for alleged breach of the contract in not making payment to recover the wages or penalties withheld. Mter petitioner State Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) determined that respondent G & G Fire Sprinklers, Inc. (G & G), as a subcontractor on three public works projects, had violated the Code, it issued notices direct...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »