Us Supreme Court Court November 2003 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.
Barnhart Vs. Thomas
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Barnhart v. Thomas - 02-763 (2003) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2003 BARNHART V. THOMAS SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES BARNHART, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY v. THOMAS certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the third circuit No. 02763. Argued October 14, 2003Decided November 12, 2003 A person is disabled, and thereby eligible for Social Security disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), only if his physical or mental impairment or impairments are of such severity that he is not only unable to do his previous work but cannot, considering his age, education, and work experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy. 42 U. S. C. 423(d)(2)(A), 1382c(a)(3)(B) (emphasis added) (hereinafter 423(d)(2)(A)). After her job as an elevator operator was eliminated, respondent Thomas applied for disability insurance benefits and SSI. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that her impairmen...
Mitchell Vs. Esparza
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Nov-03-2003
Mitchell v. Esparza - 02-1369 (2003) Mitchell v. Esparza - 02-1369 (2003) PER CURIAM MITCHELL V. ESPARZA 540 U. S. ____ (2003) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES BETTY MITCHELL, WARDEN v. GREGORY ESPARZA on petition for writ of certiorari to the unitedstates court of appeals for the sixth circuit No. 021369. Decided November 3, 2003 Per Curiam. The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the grant of habeas relief to respondent Gregory Esparza after concluding that, because the Eighth Amendment requires the State to narrow the class of death eligible defendants, the Ohio Court of Appeals had improperly subjected respondents claims to harmless-error review. 310 F. 3d 414 (2002). This decision ignores the limits imposed on federal habeas review by 28 U. S. C. 2254(d), and we therefore grant the petition for certiorari and reverse. In February 1983, respondent Esparza entered a store in Toledo, Ohio, and approached two employees, Melanie Gerschultz and James...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›