Us Supreme Court Court December 2004 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.
Brosseau Vs. Haugen
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Brosseau v. Haugen - 03-1261 (2004) Brosseau v. Haugen - 03-1261 (2004) PER CURIAM BROSSEAU V. HAUGEN 543 U. S. ____ (2004) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ROCHELLE BROSSEAU v. KENNETH J. HAUGEN on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 031261.Decided December 13, 2004 Per Curiam. Officer Rochelle Brosseau, a member of the Puyallup, Washington, Police Department, shot Kenneth Haugen in the back as he attempted to flee from law enforcement authorities in his vehicle. Haugen subsequently filed this action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington pursuant to Rev. Stat. 1979, 42 U. S. C. 1983. He alleged that the shot fired by Brosseau constituted excessive force and violated his federal constitutional rights.[ Footnote 1 ] The District Court granted summary judgment to Brosseau after finding she was entitled to qualified immunity. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit re...
Florida Vs. Nixon
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Florida v. Nixon - 03-931 (2004) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 FLORIDA V. NIXON SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FLORIDA v. NIXON certiorari to the supreme court of florida No. 03931.Argued November 2, 2004Decided December 13, 2004 Respondent Nixon was arrested for a brutal murder. Questioned by the police, Nixon described in graphic detail how he had kidnaped and killed his victim. After gathering overwhelming evidence of his guilt, the State indicted Nixon for first-degree murder and related crimes. Assistant public defender Corin, assigned to represent Nixon, filed a plea of not guilty and deposed all of the States potential witnesses. Satisfied that Nixons guilt was not subject to reasonable dispute, Corin commenced plea negotiations, but the prosecutors refused to recommend a sentence other than death. Faced with the inevitability of going to trial on a capital charge, and a strong case for the prosecution, Corin concluded that his best course would be to concede Nixons...
Cooper Industries, Inc. Vs. Aviall Services, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Aviall Services, Inc. - 02-1192 (2004) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 COOPER INDUSTRIES, INC. V. AVIALL SERVICES, INC. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES COOPER INDUSTRIES, INC. v. AVIALL SERVICES, INC. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit No. 021192.Argued October 6, 2004Decided December 13, 2004 The enabling clause of 113(f)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as added by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), provides that any person may seek contribution from any other person liable or potentially liable under CERCLA 107(a) during or following any civil action under CERCLA 106 (which authorizes the Federal Government to compel responsible parties to clean up contaminated areas, see Key Tronic Corp. v. United States, 511 U. S. 809 , 814), or CERCLA 107(a) (which empowers the Government to recover its response costs from pot...
Devenpeck Vs. Alford
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Devenpeck v. Alford - 03-710 (2004) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 DEVENPECK V. ALFORD SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DEVENPECK et al. v. ALFORD certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 03710.Argued November 8, 2004Decided December 13, 2004 Believing that respondent was impersonating a police officer, petitioner Haner, a Washington State Patrol officer, pursued and pulled over respondents vehicle. While questioning respondent at the scene, petitioner Devenpeck, Haners supervisor, discovered that respondent was taping their conversation and arrested him for violating the States Privacy Act. The state trial court subsequently dismissed the charge. Respondent then filed this suit in federal court, claiming, among other things, that his arrest violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The District Court denied petitioners qualified immunity, and the case went to trial. The jury was instructed, inter alia, that respondent had to establish...
Kowalski Vs. Tesmer
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Kowalski v. Tesmer - 03-407 (2004) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 KOWALSKI V. TESMER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES KOWALSKI, JUDGE, 26th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT OF MICHIGAN, et al. v. TESMER et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit No. 03407.Argued October 4, 2004Decided December 13, 2004 After Michigans Constitution was amended to require that an appeal by an accused pleading guilty or nolo contendere be by leave of the court, several state judges denied appointed appellate counsel to indigents pleading guilty, and the Michigan Legislature subsequently codified this practice. The two attorney respondents joined three indigent criminal defendants in filing suit in Federal District Court, alleging that the practice denies indigents their federal due process and equal protection rights. The District Court held the practice and statute unconstitutional, but a Sixth Circuit panel reversed, holding that Younger v. Harris, 401 U. S. 37 ...
Kp Permanent Make-up, Inc. Vs. Lasting Impression I, Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Dec-08-2004
KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc. - 03-409 (2004) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2004 KP PERMANENT MAKE-UP, INC. V. LASTINGIMPRESSION I, INC. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES KP PERMANENT MAKE-UP, INC. v. LASTING IMPRESSION I, INC., et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 03409.Argued October 5, 2004Decided December 8, 2004 Petitioner KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc., and respondents (collectively Lasting) all use the term micro color (as one word or two, singular or plural) in marketing permanent cosmetic makeup. The Court accepts KPs claim that it has used the single-word version since 1990 or 1991. In 1992, Lasting registered a trademark that included the words Micro Colors under 15 U. S. C. 1051, and, in 1999, the registration became incontestable, 1065. When Lasting demanded that KP stop using the word microcolor, KP sued for declaratory relief. Lasting counterclaimed, alleging, inter alia, that KP had infringed Las...
San Diego Vs. Roe
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Dec-06-2004
San Diego v. Roe - 03-1669 (2004) San Diego v. Roe - 03-1669 (2004) PER CURIAM SAN DIEGO V. ROE 543 U. S. ____ (2004) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CITY OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA et al. v. JOHN ROE on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 031669.Decided December 6, 2004 Per Curiam. The city of San Diego (City), a petitioner here, terminated a police officer, respondent, for selling videotapes he made and for related activity. The tapes showed the respondent engaging in sexually explicit acts. Respondent brought suit alleging, among other things, that the termination violated his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to freedom of speech. The United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted summary judgment to the City. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed. ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›