Volume 489 — United States Reports

Texas Monthly v. Bullock, 489 U.S. 1 (1989), was a case brought before the US Supreme Court in November 1988. The case (initiated by the publishers of Texas Monthly, a well-known general-interest magazine in Texas) was to test the legality of a Texas statute that exempted religious publications from paying state sales tax.

the State of Indiana and a local prosecutor (respondents) filed a civil action in state court against petitioner operator of an "adult bookstore," alleging that it had violated the state Racketeer… Held: This Court has jurisdiction to hear No. 87-614.

After a jury awarded petitioner $10,000 in damages on his claim that respondent sheriff's deputy had beaten him and thereby deprived him of his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Federal… Held: An attorney's fee allowed under § 1988 is not limited to the amount provided in the plaintiff's contingent-fee arrangement with his counsel.

Petitioner Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (Firestone) maintained, and was the plan administrator and fiduciary of, a termination pay plan and two other unfunded employee benefit plans governed by the… Held: De novo review is the appropriate standard for reviewing Firestone's denial of benefits to respondents. Pp. 108-115.

Petitioner mailtruck drivers, employees of the United States Postal Service, were separately charged in state criminal complaints with traffic violations arising out of unrelated incidents while they… Held: Federal officer removal under § 1442(a) must be predicated upon averment of a federal defense. Pp. 124-139. (a) For almost 125 years, this Court's decisions have understood § 1442(a) and its predecessor statutes to require such an averment.

Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc., 489 U.S. 141 (1989), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding a state anti-plug molding law preempted because it partially duplicated and therefore interfered with the balance Congress had struck by federal patent law. The decision reaffirmed the Supreme Court's earlier decision in Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co. (1964), which held a state unfair competition law preempted on the same ground.

As part of the merger of a company that they owned with another company, petitioners exchanged stock in their company for stock in the other company. Held: Petitioners' motion for prejudgment interest constituted a Rule 59(e) motion and rendered ineffective under Rule 4(a)(4) their notice of appeal filed before a ruling on that motion. Pp. 173-179. (a) Prejudgment interest is part of the compensation due a plaintiff.

DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on February 22, 1989. The court held that a state government agency's failure to prevent child abuse by a custodial parent does not violate the child's right to liberty for the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Section 11702 of the California Elections Code (Code) forbids the official governing bodies of political parties to endorse or oppose candidates in primary elections, while… Held: The challenged California election laws are invalid, since they burden the First Amendment rights of political parties and their members without serving a compelling state interest. Pp. 222-233. (a) The ban on primary endorsements in §§ 11702 and 29430 violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

After respondent filed a petition under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code of 1978 (Code), the Government filed proof of a prepetition claim for unpaid withholding and social security taxes,… Held: Section 506(b) entitles a creditor to receive postpetition interest on a nonconsensual oversecured claim allowed in a bankruptcy proceeding. Pp. 238-249.

Harris v. Reed, 489 U.S. 255 (1989), is a 1989 United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the plain statement rule of Michigan v. Long applies to federal habeas proceedings originating from state court judgments. This rule prohibits federal courts from reviewing questions of federal law in state court decisions if the state court opinion contains a "plain statement" that its decision is based on an "adequate and independent state ground".

Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the application of newly announced rules of law in habeas corpus proceedings. This case addresses the Federal Court's threshold standard of deciding whether Constitutional claims will be heard. Application of the "Teague test" at the most basic level limits habeas corpus.

Held: and respondent contends here, that the submission of a new claim to a State’s highest court on discretionary review constitutes a fair presentation. We disagree. Although we have- rejected a narrow interpretation of § 2254(c), we have not blue-penciled the provision from the text of the statute.

Held: because the IRS “can consult with Canada’s competent authority and can be expected to have greater familiarity with Canadian administrative procedures.” 813 F. 2d, at 250 .

Although respondent fell down several times and was incoherent following her arrest by officers of petitioner city's police department, the officers summoned no medical assistance for her. Held: The writ of certiorari will not be dismissed as improvidently granted on the basis of respondent's claim that petitioner failed to preserve for review the principal issues before this Court.

At the start of jury selection for respondent's Florida state-court trial for first-degree murder, the trial judge instructed the prospective jurors on… Held: Caldwell does not provide cause for respondent's procedural default. Despite the availability of a claim that the instructions in question violated state law, respondent did not object to them at trial or challenge them on appeal. As a result, Florida law barred him from raising the issue in later state proceedings.

Although petitioner airline (TWA) and respondent flight attendants' union (IFFA) pursued all the required dispute resolution mechanisms of the Railway Labor Act (RLA), their negotiations over a new… Held: An employer is not required by the RLA to lay off junior crossover employees in order to reinstate more senior full-term strikers at the conclusion of a strike. Pp. 423-443.

A construction contract between appellant and appellee contained an agreement to arbitrate all disputes arising out of the contract and a choice-of-law clause providing that the contract would be… Held: The Court of Appeal's conclusion that the parties intended the choice-of-law clause to incorporate the California arbitration rules into their arbitration agreement is a question of state law, which this Court will not set aside. Pp. 474-476.

The issues for decision are whether a regulation adopted by appellee State Corporation Commission of Kansas (KCC) (1) was pre-empted by the federal Natural Gas Act (NGA) or (2) violates the Commerce… Held: Congress has not exercised its power under the Supremacy Clause of Art. VI of the Constitution to pre-empt the KCC regulation, and therefore the judgment of the Kansas Supreme Court holding that the Commission's regulation was not pre-empted is affirmed. Pp. 509-522.

Petitioner—a language instructor for the Defense Language Institute, a federal agency—was not a union member but was within a bargaining unit for which respondent union was the exclusive bargaining… Held: Title VII of the CSRA does not confer on federal employees a private cause of action against a breach by a union representing such employees of its statutory duty of fair representation. Pp. 531-537.

Blanton v. North Las Vegas, 489 U.S. 538 (1989), is a United States Supreme Court case clarifying the limitations of the right to trial by jury.

The District Court of the Virgin Islands' Local Rule 56(b) provides that before an otherwise qualified attorney is admitted to the Virgin Islands Bar, he must "allege and prove to the satisfaction"… Held: The Court will not exercise its supervisory power in this case, since both the nature of the District Court and the reach of its residency requirements implicate interests beyond the federal system.

Due to disagreements about loans to petitioner by FirstSouth, F.A., a federal savings and loan association, etitioner filed suit against FirstSouth in state court, alleging various state law causes… Held: The statutes governing FSLIC and the Bank Board do not grant FSLIC adjudicatory power over creditors' claims against insolvent savings and loan associations under FSLIC receivership and do not divest the courts of jurisdiction to consider those claims de novo. Pp. 572-579.

Petitioners' decedent (Brower) was killed when the stolen car he had been driving at high speeds to elude pursuing police crashed into a police roadblock. Held: Consistent with the language, history, and judicial construction of the Fourth Amendment, a seizure occurs when governmental termination of a person's movement is effected through means intentionally applied.

Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Association, 489 U.S. 602 (1989), was the U.S. Supreme Court case that paved the way for random drug testing of public employees in "safety sensitive" positions.

National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the Fourth Amendment and its implication on drug testing programs. The majority of the Court upheld the drug testing program in the United States Customs Service.

Board of Estimate of City of New York v. Morris, 489 U.S. 688 (1989), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court regarding the structure of the New York City Board of Estimate.

Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705 (1989), is a United States Supreme Court decision on criminal law and procedure. By a 5–4 margin it upheld the mail fraud conviction of an Illinois man and resolved a conflict among the appellate circuits over which test to use to determine if a defendant was entitled to a jury instruction allowing conviction on a lesser included charge. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote for the majority; Antonin Scalia for the dissent.

Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, gain resulting from the sale or exchange of property is generally treated as capital gain. Held: Section 356(a)'s language and history, as well as a commonsense understanding of the economic substance of the transaction at issue, establish that NL's boot payment to the taxpayer is subject to capital gains rather than ordinary income treatment. Pp. 737-745.

United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989), was a case before the United States Supreme Court.

Petitioners, state and local teachers' associations and several of their members and employees, brought suit in the District Court under… Held: The lower courts' "central issue" test for determining "prevailing party" status under § 1988 is rejected in favor of a standard requiring only that parties " 'succeed on any significant issue in the litigation which achieves some of the benefit [they] sought in bringing the suit.' " Nadeau v. Helgemoe, 581 F.2d 275, 278-279, quoted…

Petitioners moved to dismiss a federal indictment against them on the ground, inter alia, that the prosecution had violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(2)—which… Held: A district court order denying a defendant's motion to dismiss an indictment for an alleged violation of Rule 6(e) is not immediately appealable under § 1291. Since petitioners have not yet been sentenced, the District Court's order is not a final judgment ending the litigation on the merits.

Davis v. Michigan Department of Treasury, 489 U.S. 803 (1989), is a case in the Supreme Court of the United States holding that states may not tax federal pensions if they exempt their own state pensions from taxation. In the 1930s, the federal and state governments began to charge income tax on salaries paid to each other's employees. However, reciprocal treatment was required under the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity. The Court's ruling extended the reciprocity to pensions, since they are a form of deferred compensation for services previously rendered by an employee.

Appellant, who refused a temporary retail position because the job would have required him to work on Sunday in violation of his personal religious beliefs, applied for, and was… Held: The denial of unemployment compensation benefits to appellant on the ground that his refusal to work was not based on tenets or dogma of an established religious sect violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. Sherbert v.