Volume 504 — United States Reports

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 504 of the United States Reports:

Respondent Hernandez, a prisoner proceeding pro se, filed five civil rights suits in forma pauperis against petitioner California prison… Held: The Court of Appeals incorrectly limited the power granted the courts to dismiss a frivolous case under § 1915(d). Section 1915(d) gives the courts "the unusual power to pierce the veil of the complaint's factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless." Id., at 327, 109 S.Ct., at 1833.

United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 (1992), was a U.S. Supreme Court case concerning the presentation of exculpatory evidence to a grand jury. It ruled that the federal courts do not have the supervisory power to require prosecutors to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury. The opinion was written by Justice Scalia, and the dissent by Justice Stevens.

Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 U.S. 71 (1992), was a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court addressed the criteria for the continued commitment of an individual who had been found not guilty by reason of insanity. The individual remained involuntarily confined on the justification that he was potentially dangerous even though he no longer suffered from the mental illness that served as a basis for his original commitment.

Riggins v. Nevada, 504 U.S. 127 (1992), is a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court decided whether a mentally ill person can be forced to take antipsychotic medication while they are on trial to allow the state to make sure they remain competent during the trial.

Wyatt v. Cole, 504 U.S. 158 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that private citizens are not entitled to qualified immunity from Section 1983 suits over misusing an unconstitutional public process merely because they presumed the process was constitutional.

After his arrest on, inter alia, federal drug charges, petitioner Wade gave law enforcement officials information that led them to arrest another drug dealer. Held: Federal district courts have the authority to review the Government's refusal to file a substantial-assistance motion and to grant a remedy if they find that the refusal was based on an unconstitutional motive.

Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a Tennessee law that restricted political campaigning within 100 feet (30 m) of a polling place did not violate the First Amendment.

As part of the settlement of a sex discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) paid backpay to affected employees, including… Held: Backpay awards in settlement of Title VII claims are not excludable from gross income under § 104(a)(2). Pp. 233-242.

Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255 (1992), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. The court held that, to prove that a public official has committed extortion in violation of the Hobbs Act by accepting a payment, the government is not required to show that the official took an "affirmative act" to induce the payment.

Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court ruling, since overturned, concerning use tax. The decision effectively prevented states from collecting any sales tax from retail purchases made over the internet or other e-commerce route unless the seller had a physical presence in the state. The ruling was based on the Dormant Commerce Clause, preventing states from interfering with interstate commerce unless authorized by the United States Congress. The case resulted from an attempt by North Dakota seeking to collect sales tax on licensed computer software offered by the Quill Corporation, an office supply retailer with no North Dakota presence, that allowed users to place orders directly with Quill.

Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt, 504 U.S. 334 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that an Alabama law imposing a fee (of $72 per ton) on out-of-state hazardous waste being disposed of in-state violated the Dormant Commerce Clause.

The Waste Import Restrictions of Michigan's Solid Waste Management Act (SWMA) provide that solid waste generated in another county, state, or country cannot be accepted for disposal unless explicitly… Held: The Waste Import Restrictions unambiguously discriminate against interstate commerce and are appropriately characterized as protectionist measures that cannot withstand Commerce Clause scrutiny. Pp. 358-368.

In order to ensure that the States would not undo the anticipated benefits of federal deregulation of the airline industry, the pre-emption provision of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (ADA)… Held: Assuming that § 1305(a)(1) pre-empts state enforcement of the fare advertising portions of the NAAG guidelines, the District Court could properly award respondents injunctive relief restraining such enforcement.

Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428 (1992), was a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court held that various Hawaii laws which worked to effectively prohibit write-in voting were not in violation of the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. The court reasoned that under Hawaii's election laws, it was relatively easy to sign up and be nominated for an election, and that the only reasonable fault is on candidates who fail to navigate that process.

Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Servs., Inc., 504 U.S. 451 (1992), is a 1992 Supreme Court decision in which the Court held that even though an equipment manufacturer lacked significant market power in the primary market for its equipment—copier-duplicators and other imaging equipment—nonetheless, it could have sufficient market power in the secondary aftermarket for repair parts to be liable under the antitrust laws for its exclusionary conduct in the aftermarket. The reason was that it was possible that, once customers were committed to the particular brand by having purchased a unit, they were "locked in" and no longer had any realistic alternative to turn to for repair parts.

United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Company, 504 U.S. 505 (1992), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States.

After a Florida jury found petitioner Sochor guilty of capital murder, the jury was instructed at the penalty hearing on the possibility of finding… Held: among other things, that the question whether the jury instruction on the heinousness factor was unconstitutionally vague had been waived for failure to object. The court also held that the evidence failed to support the trial judge's finding of the coldness factor, but nevertheless affirmed the death sentence. Held: 1.

Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992), was a landmark Supreme Court of the United States decision, handed down on June 12, 1992, that heightened standing requirements under Article III of the United States Constitution. It is "one of the most influential cases in modern environmental standing jurisprudence."

As part of a plan to stabilize petitioner Argentina's currency, that country and petitioner bank (collectively Argentina) issued bonds, called "Bonods," which provided for… Held: The District Court properly asserted jurisdiction under the FSIA. Pp. 610-620. (a) The issuance of the Bonods was a "commercial activity" under the FSIA, and the rescheduling of the maturity dates on those instruments was taken "in connection with" that activity within the meaning of § 1605(a)(2).

Petitioner Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint charging respondent title insurance companies with horizontal price fixing in setting fees for title searches and examinations in… Held: inter alia, that the rates had been fixed in all four States, but that, in Wisconsin and Montana, respondents' anticompetitive activities were entitled to state-action immunity, as contemplated in Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341, 63 S.Ct. 307, 87 L.Ed. 315, and its progeny.

Respondents sued petitioner, their employer, under the Federal Employers' Liability Act in the state court in Yellowstone County, Montana. Held: The distinction in treatment contained in Montana's venue rules does not offend the Equal Protection Clause.

United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the respondent's forcible abduction from a foreign country, despite the existence of an extradition treaty with said country, does not prohibit him from being tried before a U.S. court for violations of American criminal laws. The ruling reconfirmed the Ker-Frisbie Doctrine, established in Ker v. Illinois (1886) and Frisbie v. Collins (1952), which generally permits the prosecution of criminal defendants regardless of whether their presence was obtained in accordance with an applicable extradition treaty.

Ankenbrandt v. Richards, 504 U.S. 689 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that, notwithstanding the traditional exception to diversity jurisdiction prohibiting federal courts from hearing domestic relations cases, federal courts may hear money damages suits between former spouses. In Ankenbrandt, a woman, as next friend of her two daughters, sued her ex-husband and his “female companion” for abusing the children of the marriage. The mother filed suit in federal court, requesting money damages. In the proceedings below, both the federal district court and the federal appellate court held that federal courts did not have jurisdiction to hear domestic relations cases, and that therefore, the case had to be dismissed. The Supreme Court, however, reversed.

Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 (1992), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court. The case established the right of defendants to challenge for cause any juror that would automatically impose the death penalty in all capital cases.

Respondent Shumate was a participant in his employer's pension plan, which contained the anti-alienation provision required for tax qualification… Held: inter alia, that the latter phrase embraces only state law, not federal law such as ERISA, and that Shumate's interest in the plan did not qualify for protection as a spendthrift trust under state law. The court ordered that Shumate's interest in the plan be paid over to petitioner, as trustee of Shumate's bankruptcy estate.

Allied-Signal, Inc. v. Director, 504 U.S. 768 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that, if a company is in multiple and independent lines of business in and outside a state, then that state may tax the company's income from in-state activities only.

Held: this distinction did not make a difference for sentencing purposes. Id., at 626 . Similarly, in U.S. v. Beltran-Felix, 934 F.2d 1075 (1991), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 955 , 117 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that, for purposes of sentencing under 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(B), a solution containing amphetamine need not be a "marketable mixture" in a distributable state.

Held: United States v. Kikumura, 918 F. 2d 1084, 1098-1102 (CA3 1990), and two have suggested, United States v. Townley, 929 F. 2d 365, 369-370 (CA8 1991); United States v. Restrepo, 946 F. 2d 654, 661, n. 12 (CA9 1991) (en banc), cert. denied, 503 U. S. 961 (1992); Restrepo, 946 F. 2d, at 661-663 (Tang, J., concurring), id., at 664-679 (Norris, J., dissenting), that a clear-and-convincing-evidence standard is appropriate…