Volume 382 — United States Reports

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 382 of the United States Reports:

Albertson v. Subversive Activities Control Board, 382 U.S. 70 (1965), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on November 15, 1965, that persons (in this case, William Albertson) believed to be members of the Communist Party of the United States of America could not be required to register as party members with the Subversive Activities Control Board because the information which party members were required to submit could form the basis of their prosecution for being party members, which is a crime, and therefore deprived them of their self-incrimination rights under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Held: and the United States conceded, that presence alone was insufficient evidence to convict of the specific offense proscribed by § 5601 (a)(1), absent some evidence that the defendant engaged in conduct directly related to the crime of possession, custody or control.

Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp., 382 U.S. 172 (1965), was a 1965 decision of the United States Supreme Court that held, for the first time, that enforcement of a fraudulently procured patent violated the antitrust laws and provided a basis for a claim of treble damages if it caused a substantial anticompetitive effect.

from pages 181-183 intentionally omitted] John H. Hanninen, McCreary Hinslea & Ray, Cleveland, Ohio, for petitioners. Lee Pressman, New York City, for respondents. Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion of the Court. 1 The present controversy once again brings before the Court the troublesome question of where lies the line between permissible and federally preempted state regulation of union activities.

United States v. Huck Manufacturing Co., 382 U.S. 197 (1965), is the most recent patent-license price-fixing case to reach the United States Supreme Court. It was inconclusive, as the Court split 4–4 and affirmed the decision of the lower court without opinion.

from pages 205-206 intentionally omitted] Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., Washington, D.C., for petitioners. Sol. Gen. Thurgood Marshall for respondents. Held: and the Board entered a cease-and-desist order against the company, 146 N.L.R.B. 1582. The company petitioned for review in the Second Circuit, and the Board filed a cross-petition for enforcement. The Union—the successful party before the Board—moved to intervene, alleging numerous grounds in support.

Held: however, that even under these circumstances, Western Pacific is not a 'connecting line' eligible to complain of the alleged discrimination.

United States v. Louisiana, 382 U.S. 288 (1965), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the state of Louisiana's entitlement to the lands, minerals and other natural resources underlying the Gulf of Mexico.

Held: did only these 'two things: (1) Accepted the resignation of the City of Macon as trustee of Baconsfield; and (2) appointed new trustees,' 220 Ga. 280, 284, 138 S.E.2d 573, 576. 32 The State Supreme Court's interpretation of the scope and effect of this Georgia decree should be binding upon us unless the State Supreme Court has somehow lost its power to control and limit the scope and effect of Georgia trial court…

Katchen v. Landy, 382 U.S. 323 (1966), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that because bankruptcy courts sit in equity, they may order the forfeiture of property without seating a jury to find facts. The statute authorizing the bankruptcy court simply provided the bankruptcy court with this power. That blanket grant of power was later held to violate the Seventh Amendment jury trial right in Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg.

from pages 341-342 intentionally omitted] Sol. Gen. Thurgood Marshall for petitioner. Mr. J. V. Hammett, Lampasas, Tex., for respondent. Mr. Justice FORTAS delivered the opinion of the Court. 1 This case presents an aspect of the continuing problem of the interaction of federal and state laws in our complex federal system.

Held: in effect, that invalidity of the 'license fee' as applied was a valid defense to prosecution under Vehicle Code § 4000. In these circumstances, and since the record is reasonably to be read as showing that Captain Buzard would have registered his Oldsmobile but for the demand for payment of the 2% tax, the California Supreme Court's reversal of his conviction is affirmed. 12 Affirmed. 1 50 U.S.C.App. § 574(2)(b).

Held: explicitly and unambiguously, 'that the exemption from compulsory self-incrimination in the courts of the states is not secured by any part of the Federal Constitution.' 211 U.S., at 114, 29 S.Ct., at 26. Having thus rejected the first proposition advanced by the plaintiffs in error, the Court refrained from passing on the second.

from pages 423-424 intentionally omitted] Jack L. Lessenberry and James E. Youngdahl, Little Rock, Ark., for appellants. Robert V. Light, Little Rock, Ark., and Dennis Lyons, Washington, D.C., for appellees.