Volume 467 — United States Reports

This is a list of all United States Supreme Court cases from volume 467 of the United States Reports:

Respondent Rhinehart is the spiritual leader of a religious group, respondent Aquarian Foundation. Held: The protective order issued in this case does not offend the First Amendment. Pp. 29-37.

After court-authorized wiretaps of telephones by Georgia police revealed a large lottery operation, the police executed search warrants at… Held: Under the Sixth Amendment, any closure of a suppression hearing over the objections of the accused must meet the following tests: the party seeking to close the hearing must advance an overriding interest that is likely to be prejudiced; the closure must be no broader than necessary to protect that interest; the trial court must…

Under the Medicare program, providers of health care services are reimbursed for the reasonable cost of services rendered to Medicare beneficiaries and are required to submit annual cost reports… Held: The Government is not estopped from recovering the funds in question from respondent, since respondent has not demonstrated that the traditional elements of an estoppel are present with respect to either its change in position or its reliance on Travelers' advice. Pp. 59-66.

Petitioner, a woman lawyer, was employed in 1972 as an associate with respondent law firm, a general partnership, but her employment was terminated in 1979 after respondent decided not to invite her… Held: Petitioner's complaint states a claim cognizable under Title VII, and she therefore is entitled to her day in court to prove her allegations. Pp. 73-79.

South-Central Timber Development v. Wunnicke, 467 U.S. 82 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held unconstitutional Alaska's inclusion of a requirement that purchasers of state-owned timber process it within state before it was shipped out of state. According to a plurality opinion by Justice White, Alaska could not impose "downstream" conditions in the timber-processing market as a result of its ownership of the timber itself. The opinion summarized "[the] limit of the market-participant doctrine" as "allowing a State to impose burdens on commerce within the market in which it is a participant, but [to] go no further. The State may not impose conditions [that] have a substantial regulatory effect outside of that particular market."

The Social Security Act (Act) and implementing regulations provide a four-step process for the administrative review and adjudication of disputed disability benefit claims under Title II of the Act. Held: The District Court's injunction constituted an unwarranted judicial intrusion into the pervasively regulated area of claims adjudication under Title II.

The North Dakota statute (Chapter 27-19) governing the Indian civil jurisdiction of the state courts provides that jurisdiction shall extend "over all civil causes of action… Held: No federal law or policy required the North Dakota courts to forgo in this case the jurisdiction recognized in Vermillion, supra. Pp. 147-151. (a) The exercise of state-court jurisdiction in this case would not interfere with the right of tribal Indians to govern themselves under their own laws.

Respondent, a Federal Government employee injured in an automobile accident in Pennsylvania while on official business, received payment from the Government under the Federal… Held: Section 8132 entitles the United States to be reimbursed for FECA compensation out of any damages award or settlement made in satisfaction of third-party liability for personal injury or death, regardless of whether the award or settlement is for losses other than medical expenses and lost wages.

United States v. Gouveia, 467 U.S. 180 (1984), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that prisoners in administrative segregation pending the investigation of crimes committed within the prison had no Sixth Amendment entitlement to counsel prior to the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings against them. In an opinion written by Justice William Rehnquist, the Court stated that the right to counsel may extend to "'critical' pretrial proceedings" that are adversarial in nature, but the Sixth Amendment right to counsel "attaches at the initiation of adversary judicial criminal proceedings".

Held: these characteristics make the Arizona capital sentencing proceeding indistinguishable for double jeopardy purposes from the capital sentencing proceeding in Missouri. Id., at 171-174 , 665 P. 2d, at 53-56 . That the sentencer in Arizona is the trial judge rather than the jury does not render the sentencing proceeding any less like a trial.

Bernal v. Fainter, 467 U.S. 216 (1984), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Equal Protection Clause prohibited the state of Texas from barring noncitizens from applying for commission as a notary public.

Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a state could use eminent domain to take land that was overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of private landowners and redistribute it to the wider population of private residents.

Section 320.5(3)(b) of the New York Family Court Act authorizes pretrial detention of an accused juvenile delinquent based on a finding that there is a "serious risk" that… Held: Section 320.5(3)(b) is not invalid under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 263-281. (a) Preventive detention under the statute serves the legitimate state objective, held in common with every State, of protecting both the juvenile and society from the hazards of pretrial crime.

In this original action, Colorado seeks an equitable apportionment of the waters of the Vermejo River, which originates in Colorado and… Held: inter alia, that the Master properly did not focus exclusively on the priority of uses along the river, and that other factors—such as waste, availability of reasonable conservation measures, and the balance of benefit and harm from diversion—could be considered in the apportionment calculus. 459 U.S. 176, 103 ,S.Ct. 539, 74 L.Ed.2d…

To bring destabilizing competition among dairy farmers under control, the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 (Act) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) to issue milk market… Held: inter alia, that the consumers had no standing to challenge the orders.

The Motor Carrier Act of 1980 in 49 U.S.C. § 10706(b)(3) established specific guidelines to which motor-carrier rate bureaus must conform if they are to receive antitrust immunity. Held: The proposed new remedy lies within the ICC's discretionary authority, and the ICC does not exceed its authority by nullifying effective tariffs submitted in substantial violation of rate-bureau agreements. Pp. 24622468.

Since enactment of the Bonneville Project Act of 1937 (Project Act), the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has marketed low-cost hydroelectric power generated by a series of dams along the… Held: Giving the Administrator's interpretation of the Regional Act the deference it is due, his interpretation is a fully reasonable one, particularly in the absence of any statutory provision affirmatively indicating the contrary.

Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Predrag Stevic, 467 U.S. 407 (1984), was a Supreme Court of the United States decision that held if an alien seeks to avoid deportation proceedings by claiming that he will be persecuted if he is returned to his native land, he must show a "clear probability" that he will be persecuted there.

Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (1984), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that recognized an "inevitable discovery" exception to the exclusionary rule. The exclusionary rule makes some evidence gathered through violations of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure, inadmissible in criminal trials as "fruit of the poisonous tree". In Nix, the Court ruled that evidence that would inevitably have been discovered by law enforcement through legal means remained admissible.

The federal Agricultural Fair Practices Act of 1967 (AFPA) was enacted to enable individual farmers and other producers of agricultural commodities to join together voluntarily in cooperative… Held: The challenged provisions of the Michigan Act are pre-empted by the AFPA. Pp. 469-478.

As a result of a killing and a theft of property, respondent was indicted by an Ohio grand jury on one count each of murder, involuntary manslaughter, aggravated robbery, and grand theft. Held: The Double Jeopardy Clause does not prohibit the State from continuing its prosecution of respondent on the murder and aggravated robbery charges. Pp. 497-502. (a) This case does not concern the double jeopardy protection against multiple punishments for the same offense.

Mabry v. Johnson, 467 U.S. 504 (1984), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that accepting a first plea bargain that is later rescinded does not create a right to have that first bargain specifically enforced when the criminal defendant accepts a second, less-beneficial plea bargain.

After determining that four employees of appellee United States Postal Service were delinquent in their payment of state income taxes, appellant Franchise Tax Board of California served process on… Held: When administrative process of the type employed by appellant issues against appellee, it has been "sued" within the meaning of § 401(1), and must respond to that process. Pp. 516-525.

Title I of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA) provides a "Bill of Rights" for labor union members, including various protections for members involved in union elections. Held: The District Court overstepped the bounds of "appropriate" relief under Title I when it enjoined an ongoing union election and ordered that a new election be held pursuant to procedures imposed by the court. Pp. 535-551.

Respondent Stotts, a black member of petitioner Memphis, Tenn., Fire Department, filed a class action in Federal District Court charging that the… Held: These cases are not rendered moot by the facts that the preliminary injunction purportedly applied only to 1981 layoffs, that all white employees laid off as a result of the injunction were restored to duty only one month after their layoff, and that others who were demoted have been offered back their old positions.

The Staggers Rail Act of 1980 amendments to the Interstate Commerce Act (Act) regulate the process by which rail carriers may abandon unprofitable lines and provide a mechanism for shippers to obtain… Held: Appellant's proposed application of the Minnesota condemnation statute is not pre-empted by the Staggers Rail Act amendments to the Act. Pp. 627-637.

West Virginia imposes a gross receipts tax on businesses selling tangible property at wholesale. Local manufacturers are exempt from the tax, but are subject to a higher manufacturing tax. Held: The wholesale gross receipts tax unconstitutionally discriminates against interstate commerce. Pp. 642-646. (a) Under the Commerce Clause, a State may not tax a transaction or incident more heavily when it crosses state lines than when it occurs entirely within the State.

New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court regarding the public safety exception to the normal Fifth Amendment requirements of the Miranda warning.

Although Oklahoma does not prohibit the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages within the State, it prohibits, in general, the advertising of such beverages. Held: inter alia, that the State's advertising ban was an unconstitutional restriction on petitioners' right to engage in protected commercial speech. The Court of Appeals reversed. Held: 1.

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), enacted in 1974, created a pension plan termination insurance program whereby the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), a wholly owned… Held: Application of the withdrawal liability provisions of the MPPAA during the 5-month period prior to the statute's enactment does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Pp. 728-734.

During its nonpublic investigation into possible violations of the federal securities laws involving respondents, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued subpoenas to certain of… Held: The SEC is not required to notify the "targets" of nonpublic investigations into possible violations of the securities laws when the SEC issues subpoenas to third parties. The SEC has discretion to determine when such notice would be appropriate and when it would not. Pp. 741-751.

Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp., 467 U.S. 752 (1984), is a major US antitrust law case decided by the Supreme Court concerning the Pittsburgh firm Copperweld Corporation and the Chicago firm Independence Tube. It held that a parent company is incapable of conspiring with its wholly owned subsidiary for purposes of Section 1 of the Sherman Act because they cannot be considered separate economic entities.

The Federal Aviation Act of 1958 directs the Secretary of Transportation to promote safety in air transportation by promulgating reasonable rules and regulations governing the inspection, servicing,… Held: The actions are barred by the discretionary function exception of the FTCA. Pp. 807-821. (a) It is the nature of the conduct, rather than the status of the actor, that governs whether the discretionary function exception applies in a given case.

Held: however, that the writ was not “legal process” within the meaning of § 659(f) because the statutory definition of that term requires that it be issued by a “court of competent jurisdiction.” 2 He reasoned that the portion of the divorce decree ordering respondent to make alimony and child support payments had not been issued by a court of competent jurisdiction because the Alabama court did not have personal…

Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that set forth the legal test used when U.S. federal courts must defer to a government agency's interpretation of a law or statute. The decision articulated a doctrine known as "Chevron deference". Chevron deference consisted of a two-part test that was deferential to government agencies: first, whether Congress has spoken directly to the precise issue at question, and second, "whether the agency's answer is based on a permissible construction of the statute". The decision involved a legal challenge to a change in the U.S. government's interpretation of the word "source" in the Clean Air Act of 1963.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought an action in Federal District Court against respondent Federal Reserve Bank, alleging that one of respondent's branches (the Bank) violated §… Held: The Baxter petitioners are not precluded from maintaining their separate action against the Bank.

Sure-Tan, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 467 U.S. 883 (1984) is a United States labor law case that resulted in a split decision before the Supreme Court of the United States. By a 7-2 majority, the Court ruled that undocumented immigrant workers were “employees” covered by the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA). However, by a 5-4 majority the Court ruled that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was limited in its remedies for penalizing employers who fired undocumented workers for union organizing in violation of the NLRA. The decision was one of a series limiting the rights of immigrant workers and the power of the NLRB culminating with Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB. Sure-Tan, Inc. was a small leather processing company in Chicago, Illinois.

Petitioner Tower, the Douglas County, Ore., Public Defender, represented respondent at a state robbery trial that resulted in respondent's conviction, and petitioner… Held: Respondent's complaint adequately alleges conduct "under color of" state law for purposes of § 1983, in view of the conspiracy allegations. Although appointed counsel in a state criminal prosecution does not act "under color of" state law in the normal course of conducting the defense, Polk County v.

Section 4(a) of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA or Act) provides that "[e]very employer shall be liable for and shall secure the payment to his employees" of… Held: Section 5(a)'s grant of immunity extends to general contractors.

A Maryland statute prohibits a charitable organization, in connection with any fundraising" target="_blank" title="fundraising">fundraising activity, from… Held: Respondent has standing to challenge the statute. Not only does respondent satisfy the "case" or "controversy" requirement of Art. III, because it has suffered both threatened and actual injury as a result of the statute, but there also is no prudential reason against allowing respondent to challenge the statute.

The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use data submitted by an applicant for registration of a covered product… Held: To the extent that appellee has an interest in its health, safety, and environmental data cognizable as a trade-secret property right under Missouri law, that property right is protected by the Taking Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

After a jury trial in a Pennsylvania state court in 1966, respondent was convicted of first-degree murder and rape, and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Held: The voir dire testimony and the record of publicity do not reveal the kind of "wave of public passion" that would have made a fair trial unlikely by the empaneled jury as a whole.

Held: however, that "[e]ven if we were to assume that [petitioner's] murder convictions rested in part or completely on a theory of accountability, the imposition of the death sentence under the circumstances present here was permissible." Ibid.