Volume 376 — United States Reports

Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (1964), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that districts in the United States House of Representatives must be approximately equal in population. Along with Baker v. Carr (1962) and Reynolds v. Sims (1964), it was part of a series of Warren Court cases that applied the principle of "one person, one vote" to U.S. legislative bodies.

Wright v. Rockefeller, 376 U.S. 52 (1964), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that evidence of racial consideration cannot be elevated to prima facie proof when several plausible conflicting inferences that could be drawn from that evidence were "equally or more persuasive".

Held: first, that it was erroneous as a matter of law for the Commission to order discontinuance of passenger trains under the provisions of § 13a(2) without first determining whether, once the profits from freight operations on the same line were taken into account, 'the particular segment of the railway involved is contributing its fair share to the overall company operations * * *.' 210 F.Supp. 675, 688.

Held: to remit petitioner to further administrative proceedings under the 1960 regulation. The Department of Defense, after considering petitioner’s claim for nearly a year and a half following this Court’s decision in Greene v. McElroy, supra, specifically determined that “Mr. Greene does not qualify for monetary restitution under the provisions” of the 1955 regulation.

Held: and the propriety of viewing the lands in question.

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co., 376 U.S. 225 (1964), was a United States Supreme Court case that limited state law on unfair competition when it prevents the copying of an item that is not covered by a patent.

Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting, Inc., 376 U.S. 234 (1964), was a United States Supreme Court decision that was a companion case to Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co. that the Court decided on the same day. Like Sears, Compco held that state law that in effect duplicates the protections of the US patent law is pre-empted by federal law.

New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled the freedom of speech protections in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution limit the ability of public officials to sue for defamation. The decision held that if a plaintiff in a defamation lawsuit is a public official or candidate for public office, then not only must they prove the normal elements of defamation—publication of a false defamatory statement to a third party—they must also prove that the statement was made with "actual malice", meaning the defendant either knew the statement was false or recklessly disregarded whether it might be false. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan is frequently ranked as one of the greatest Supreme Court decisions of the modern era.

Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino, 376 U.S. 398 (1964), was a United States Supreme Court case that determined that the policy of United States federal courts would be to honor the Act of State Doctrine, which dictates that the propriety of decisions of other countries relating to their internal affairs would not be questioned in the courts of the United States.

Held: possessed sufficient control over the work of the employees to qualify as a joint employer with Floors is a question which is unaffected by any possible determination as to Floors' status as an independent contractor, since Greyhound has never suggested that the employees themselves occupy an independent contractor status.

Stoner v. California, 376 U.S. 483 (1964), is a United States Supreme Court decision involving the Fourth Amendment. It was a criminal case appealed from the California Courts of Appeal after the California Supreme Court denied review. The case extended the situations under which search warrants are required as they reversed a robbery conviction made on the basis of evidence obtained in violation of the holding.

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Livingston, 376 U.S. 543 (1964), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that rights of employees under a collective bargaining agreement are not automatically lost by the disappearance by merger of the employer, and, in appropriate circumstances, the successor employer may be required to arbitrate under the contract. Particularly, the courts determine whether arbitration is required, based on the agreement and federal law.

Held: with one judge dissenting, that the doctrine of sovereign immunity required that the case be dismissed 'as an unconsented suit against the United States.' 115 U.S.App.D.C. 210, 212, 318 F.2d 181 , 183. We granted certiorari, 375 U.S. 811, 84 S.Ct. 71, 11 L.Ed.2d 47. 7 We hold, for the reasons stated below, that the Foreign Agents Registration Act plainly and unquestionably requires petitioners to register.

Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612 (1964), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that when a case is transferred from a federal court in one state to a federal court in another, the choice of law should be that of the state in which the case was originally filed.

Hamilton v. Alabama, 376 U.S. 650 (1964), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that an African American woman, Mary Hamilton, was entitled to the same courteous forms of address customarily reserved solely for whites in the Southern United States, and that calling a black person by their first name in a formal context was "a form of racial discrimination".

Held: however, that imprisonment for three months 'cannot be said to be petty or trivial.' 66 App.D.C. 11, 14, 84 F.2d 265, 268. That decision was reversed by a divided Supreme Court.