Us Supreme Court Court January 2008 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.
Ali Vs. Federal Bureau of Prisons
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-22-2008
Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons - 06-9130 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 ALI V. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ALI v . FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit No. 069130.Argued October 29, 2007Decided January 22, 2008 The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) waives the United States sovereign immunity for claims arising out of torts committed by federal employees, see 28 U. S. C. 1346(b)(1), but, as relevant here, exempts from that waiver [a]ny claim arising in respect of the assessment or collection of any tax or customs duty, or the detention of any property by any officer of customs or excise or any other law enforcement officer, 2680(c). Upon his transfer from an Atlanta federal prison to one in Kentucky, petitioner noticed that several items were missing from his personal property, which had been shipped to the new facility by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Alleging th...
New York State Bd. of Elections Vs. Lopez Torres
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-16-2008
New York State Bd. of Elections v. Lopez Torres - 06-766 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 NEW YORK STATE BD. OF ELECTIONS V.LOPEZ TORRES SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS et al. v . LOPEZ TORRES et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the second circuit No. 06766.Argued October 3, 2007Decided January 16, 2008 Under New Yorks current Constitution, State Supreme Court Justices are elected in each of the States judicial districts. Since 1921, New Yorks election law has required parties to select their nominees by a convention composed of delegates elected by party members. An individual running for delegate must submit a 500-signature petition collected within a specified time. The conventions nominees appear automatically on the general-election ballot, along with any independent candidates who meet certain statutory requirements. Respondents filed suit, seeking, inter alia, a declaration that New Yorks convention syst...
Knight Vs. Commissioner
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-16-2008
Knight v. Commissioner - 06-1286 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 KNIGHT V. COMMISSIONER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES KNIGHT, TRUSTEE OF WILLIAM L. RUDKINTESTAMENTARY TRUST v . COMMISSIONEROF INTERNAL REVENUE certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the second circuit No. 061286.Argued November 27, 2007Decided January 16, 2008 Individuals may subtract from their federal taxable income certain itemized deductions, 26 U. S. C. 63(d), but only to the extent the deductions exceed 2% of adjusted gross income, 67(a). A trust may also take such deductions subject to the 2% floor, 67(e) , except that when the relevant cost is paid or incurred in connection with the administration of the trust and would not have been incurred if the property were not held in such trust, the cost may be deducted without regard to the floor, 67(e)(1). After petitioner Knight (Trustee), the trustee of a testamentary trust (Trust), hired the Warfield firm to advise as to Trust inve...
Stoneridge Investment Partners, Llc Vs. Scientific-atlanta, Inc
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-15-2008
Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc - 06-43 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 STONERIDGE INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC V.SCIENTIFIC-ATLANTA, INC. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES STONERIDGE INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC v .SCIENTIFIC-ATLANTA, INC., et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eighth circuit No. 0643.Argued October 9, 2007Decided January 15, 2008 Alleging losses after purchasing Charter Communications, Inc., common stock, petitioner filed suit against respondents and others under 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 10b5. Acting as Charters customers and suppliers, respondents had agreed to arrangements that allowed Charter to mislead its auditor and issue a misleading financial statement affecting its stock price, but they had no role in preparing or disseminating the financial statement. Affirming the District Courts dismissal of respondents, the Eighth Circuit ...
John R. Sand and Gravel Co. Vs. United States
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-08-2008
John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States - 06-1164 (2008) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2007 JOHN R. SAND & GRAVEL CO. V. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES JOHN R. SAND & GRAVEL CO. v . UNITED STATES certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the federal circuit No. 061164.Argued November 6, 2007Decided January 8, 2008 In a Court of Federal Claims action, petitioner argued that various federal activities on land for which it held a mining lease amounted to an unconstitutional taking of its leasehold rights. The Government initially asserted that the claims were untimely under the court of claims statute of limitations, but later effectively conceded that issue and won on the merits. Although the Government did not raise timeliness on appeal, the Federal Circuit addressed the issue sU. S.onte, finding the action untimely. Held: The court of claims statute of limitations requires sU. S.onte consideration of a lawsuits timeliness, despite the Governme...
Wright Vs. Van Patten
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-07-2008
Wright v. Van Patten - 07-212 (2008) Wright v. Van Patten - 07-212 (2008) PER CURIAM WRIGHT V. VAN PATTEN 552 U. S. ____ (2008) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RANDALL WRIGHT, SHERIFF, SHAWANO COUNTY, WISCONSIN v. JOSEPH L. VAN PATTEN on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit No. 07212.Decided January 7, 2008 Per Curiam. The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that respondent Joseph Van Patten was entitled to relief under 28 U. S. C. 2254, reasoning that his lawyers assistance was presumptively ineffective owing to his participation in a plea hearing by speaker phone. Van Patten v. Deppisch, 434 F. 3d 1038 (2006). We granted certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Carey v. Musladin , 549 U. S. ___ (2006). On remand, the Seventh Circuit adhered to its original decision, concluding that [n]othing in Musladin requires that our 2006 opinion ...
Arave Vs. Hoffman
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-07-2008
Arave v. Hoffman - 07-110 (2008) Arave v. Hoffman - 07-110 (2008) 552 U. S. ____ (2008) ARAVE V. HOFFMAN 552 U. S. ____ (2008) SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AVRON J. ARAVE, WARDEN v. MAXWELL HOFFMAN on petition for writ of certiorari to the unitedstates court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 07110.Decided January 7, 2008 Per Curiam. Respondent Maxwell Hoffman was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. See State v. Hoffman , 123 Idaho 638, 851 P. 2d 934 (1993). Hoffman sought federal habeas relief on the grounds that, inter alia , his counsel had been ineffective during both pretrial plea bargaining and the sentencing phase of his trial. The District Court, finding that Hoffman had received ineffective assistance of counsel during sentencing but not during plea bargaining, granted Hoffmans federal habeas petition in part and ordered the State of Idaho to resentence him. Civ. Action No. 940200SBLW (Mar. 30, 2002), App. to Pet. for Cert...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›