Volume 364 — United States Reports

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 364 of the United States Reports:

Held: does require the Department’s recommendation to be placed in a.registrant’s file. Gonzales v. United States, supra. But there is nothing in the Act requiring the hearing officer’s report to be likewise turned over to the registrant. While the regulations formerly required that the hearing officer’s report be placed in the registrant’s file, this requirement was eliminated in 1952.

Held: that this substitution was made because Congress expanded the depreciation allowance provision of § 23(l) to include property held for the production of income.

Wolfe v. North Carolina, 364 U.S. 177 (1960), is a 1960 United States Supreme Court case in which the court, in a 5–4 decision, upheld the trespassing conviction of six African-American men who were barred from a golf course because of their race.

Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 (1960), was a US Supreme Court decision that held the "silver platter doctrine", which allowed federal prosecutors to use evidence illegally gathered by state police, to be a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339 (1960), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that found an electoral district with boundaries created to disenfranchise African Americans violated the Fifteenth Amendment.

Knetsch v. United States, 364 U.S. 361 (1960), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court concerning taxation law.

Held: however, that the Government had not established, under the standard required in denaturalization cases, that Nowak had known of the Party’s advocacy of forcible governmental overthrow.

Held: that the Small Business Administration's assertion of priority is precluded by our holding in United States v. Marxen 15 that priority attaches only to those debts owing to the United States on the date of the commencement of bankruptcy proceedings and not to debts that come into existence after that date.

Boynton v. Virginia, 364 U.S. 454 (1960), is a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court. The case overturned a judgment convicting an African American law student for trespassing by being in a restaurant in a bus terminal which was "whites only". It held that racial segregation in public transportation was illegal because such segregation violated the Interstate Commerce Act, which broadly forbade discrimination in interstate passenger transportation. It moreover held that bus transportation was sufficiently related to interstate commerce to allow the United States federal government to regulate it to forbid racial discrimination in the industry. Thurgood Marshall argued the case for Boynton. The majority opinion was written by Justice Hugo Black.

Shelton v. Tucker, 364 U.S. 479 (1960), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. By a 5–4 vote, the Court struck down an Arkansas law imposing disclosure requirements on public schoolteachers, reasoning that they were unconstitutionally overbroad.

Held: upon full consideration, in Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 , 78 S.Ct. 1401, 3 L.Ed.2d 5. The others are likewise without merit. Accordingly, the motions for stay are denied.

from pages 520-522 intentionally omitted] Sol. Gen. Mr. J. Lee Rankin, Washington, D.C., for petitioner.521 Messrs. John T. Cahill and William C. Chanler, New York City, for respondent.

Held: for venue purposes, to have been committed wherever the wrongdoer roamed. *635 United States v. Cores, 356 U. S. 405 . And see Brown v. Elliott, 225 U. S. 392 . The decisions are discrete, each looking to the nature of the crime charged.

Held: 286 U.S. at pages 114—115, 52 S.Ct. at page 462: 21 'The result is all one whether the decree has been entered after litigation or by consent * * *. In either event, a court does not abdicate its power to revoke or modify its mandate, if satisfied that what it has been doing has been turned through changing circumstances into an instrument of wrong.