Us Supreme Court Court April 2011 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.
Kentucky Vs. King
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-27-2011
Kentucky v. King SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2010 KENTUCKY V. KING SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES KENTUCKY v . KING certiorari to the supreme court of kentucky No. 091272.Argued January 12, 2011Decided May 16, 2011 Police officers in Lexington, Kentucky, followed a suspected drug dealer to an apartment complex. They smelled marijuana outside an apartment door, knocked loudly, and announced their presence. As soon as the officers began knocking, they heard noises coming from the apartment; the officers believed that these noises were consistent with the destruction of evidence. The officers announced their intent to enter the apartment, kicked in the door, and found respondent and others. They saw drugs in plain view during a protective sweep of the apartment and found additional evidence during a subsequent search. The Circuit Court denied respondents motion to suppress the evidence, holding that exigent circumstancesthe need to prevent destruction of evidencejustified the wa...
Schindler Elevator Corp. Vs. United States Ex Rel. Kirk
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
Schindler Elevator Corp. v. United States ex rel. Kirk SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2010 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP. V. UNITED STATESEX REL. KIRK SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP. v . UNITED STATES ex rel. KIRK certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the second circuit No. 10188.Argued March 1, 2011Decided May 16, 2011 The public disclosure bar of the False Claims Act (FCA) generally forecloses private parties from bringing qui tam suits to recover falsely or fraudulently obtained federal payments where those suits are based upon the public disclosure of allegations or transactions in a criminal, civil, or administrative hearing, in a congressional, administrative, or Government Accounting Office report, hearing, audit, or investigation, or from the news media. 31 U. S. C. 3730(e)(4)(A). Respondent Kirk brought such a suit, alleging that his former employer, petitioner Schindler Elevator Corp., had submitted hundreds of false claims for paymen...
United States Vs. Tohono O’odham Nation
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-04-2011
United States v. Tohono O'odham Nation SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2010 UNITED STATES V. TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES v . TOHONO OODHAM NATION certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the federal circuit No. 09846.Argued November 1, 2010Decided April 26, 2011 Respondent Tohono Oodham Nation (Nation) filed suit in Federal District Court against federal officials who managed tribal assets held in trust by the Federal Government, alleging violations of fiduciary duty and requesting equitable relief. The next day, the Nation filed this action against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims (CFC), alleging almost identical violations and requesting money damages. The CFC case was dismissed under 28 U. S. C. 1500, which bars CFC jurisdiction over a claim if the plaintiff has another suit for or in respect to that claim pending against the United States or its agents in another court. The Federal Circuit reversed, finding th...
Cullen Vs. Pinholster
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-04-2011
Cullen v. Pinholster - 09-1088 (2011) SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2010 CULLEN V. PINHOLSTER SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CULLEN, ACTING WARDEN v . PINHOLSTER certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 091088.Argued November 9, 2010Decided April 4, 2011 A California jury convicted respondent Pinholster on two counts of first-degree murder. At the penalty phase before the same jury, the prosecution produced eight witnesses, who testified about Pinholsters history of threatening and violent behavior. Pinholsters trial counsel, who unsuccessfully sought to exclude the aggravating evidence on the ground that the prosecution had not given Pinholster proper notice under California law, called only Pinholsters mother. Counsel did not call a psychiatrist, though they had consulted with Dr. Stalberg, who had diagnosed Pinholster with antisocial personality disorder. The jury recommended the death penalty, and Pinholster was sentenced to death. Pinholst...
Atandt; Mobility Llc Vs. Concepcion
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Apr-04-2011
AT&T; Mobility LLC v. Concepcion SYLLABUS OCTOBER TERM, 2010 AT&T; MOBILITY LLC V. CONCEPCION SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AT&T; MOBILITY LLC v . CONCEPCION et ux. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 09893.Argued November 9, 2010Decided April 27, 2011 The cellular telephone contract between respondents (Concepcions) and petitioner (AT&T;) provided for arbitration of all disputes, but did not permit classwide arbitration. After the Concepcions were charged sales tax on the retail value of phones provided free under their service contract, they sued AT&T; in a California Federal District Court. Their suit was consolidated with a class action alleging, inter alia , that AT&T; had engaged in false advertising and fraud by charging sales tax on free phones. The District Court denied AT&T;s motion to compel arbitration under the Concepcions contract. Relying on the California Supreme Courts Discover Bank decision, it found the arbit...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›