Volume 520 — United States Reports

This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 520 of the United States Reports:

Warner-Jenkinson Company, Inc. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co., 520 U.S. 17 (1997), was a United States Supreme Court decision in the area of patent law, affirming the continued vitality of the doctrine of equivalents while making some important refinements to the doctrine.

Arizonans for Official English v. Arizona, 520 U.S. 43 (1996), was a United States Supreme Court decision that held that Article III required standing for each stage of litigation, rather than just when a complaint is filed.

Adams v. Robertson, 520 U.S. 83 (1997), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court, in a per curiam opinion, "dismissed the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted."

* The executors of decedent Hubert's substantial estate filed a federal estate tax return about a year after his death. Held: The judgment is affirmed. 63 F.3d 1083, affirmed.

Young v. Harper, 520 U.S. 143 (1997), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that people who have been released from incarceration in programs that are equivalent to parole have the same rights as people on parole; they are entitled to a hearing before the government can return them to incarceration.

* The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) requires the Secretary of the Interior to specify animal species that are "threatened'' or "endangered'' and designate their "critical habitat,'' 16 U.S.C.… Held: Petitioners have standing to seek judicial review of the Biological Opinion. Pp. ____-____. (a) The Court of Appeals erred in concluding that petitioners lacked standing under the zone-of-interests test to bring their claims under the ESA's citizen-suit provision.

Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC is the general title of two rulings of the United States Supreme Court on the constitutionality of must-carry regulations enforced by the Federal Communications Commission on cable television operators. In the first ruling, known colloquially as Turner I, 512 U.S. 622 (1994), the Supreme Court held that cable television companies were First Amendment speakers who enjoyed free speech rights when determining what channels and content to carry on their networks, but demurred on whether the must-carry rules at issue were restrictions of those rights. After a remand to a lower court for fact-finding on the economic effects of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, the dispute returned to the Supreme Court.

* Respondent Lanier was convicted under 18 U.S.C. §242 of criminally violating the constitutional rights of five women by assaulting them sexually while he served as a state judge. Held: The Sixth Circuit employed the wrong standard for determining whether particular conduct falls within the range of criminal liability under §242.

Held: those differences were not changes subject to preclearance. The court also considered a different question, namely, whether the New System differed from the Old System; and whether Mississippi had precleared all the changes that the New System made in the Old. The court held that the Department had (on February 1) precleared the administrative changes needed to implement the NVRA.

Chandler v. Miller, 520 U.S. 305 (1997), was a case before the United States Supreme Court concerning the Constitutionality under the Fourth Amendment of a state statute requiring drug tests of all candidates for certain state offices. The case is notable as being the only one in recent years where the Supreme Court has upheld a challenge to a ballot access restriction from members of a third party, in this case the Libertarian Party of Georgia.

Held: satisfied each of these criteria. First, "needy families with children" were the intended beneficiaries of Title IV—D. 68 F. 3d, at 1150.

Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party, 520 U.S. 351 (1997), is a United States Supreme Court case holding that state governments may prohibit candidates from being listed on the ballot for more than one party. In deciding that candidates do not have a First Amendment freedom of association to represent multiple parties, this case limited the spread of electoral fusion in the United States.

Richards v. Wisconsin, 529 U.S. 385 (1997), was a case before the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not allow a blanket exception to the knock-and-announce rule for investigations of drug-related felonies.

* Respondent brought this 42 U.S.C. §1983 damages action against petitioner county, alleging, among other things, that its Deputy Burns had arrested her… Held: The county is not liable for Sheriff Moore's isolated decision to hire Burns without adequate screening, because respondent has not demonstrated that the decision reflected a conscious disregard for a high risk that Burns would use excessive force in violation of respondent's federally protected right. Pp. ____-____.

Strate v. A-1 Contractors, 520 U.S. 438 (1997), is a United States Supreme Court case addressing tribal courts' adjudicatory authority over civil matters between nonmembers of the tribe that take place on public highways in Indian Country. Applying Montana v. United States, the court held that, absent Congressional authorization, tribal courts cannot adjudicate civil matters between nonmembers that occur on state-maintained public highways passing over reservation land. Justice Ginsburg delivered the unanimous decision of the court.

* Petitioner Johnson testified before a federal grand jury, investigating, inter alia, the disposition of proceeds from her boyfriend's alleged drug trafficking, that she had… Held: The trial court's action in this case was not "plain error'' of the sort which an appellate court may notice under Rule 52(b). (a) Since §1623's text leaves no doubt that materiality is an element of perjury, Gaudin dictates that materiality in this case be decided by the jury, not the court.

** Appellee Bossier Parrish School Board (Board) is subject to the preclearance requirements of §5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (Act) and must therefore obtain the approval… Held: 1.Preclearance under §5 may not be denied solely on the basis that a covered jurisdiction's new voting "standard, practice, or procedure'' violates §2. This Court has consistently understood §5 and §2 to combat different evils and, accordingly, to impose very different duties upon the States.

* As employees of respondent Santa Fe Terminal Services, Inc. (SFTS), a wholly owned subsidiary of respondent The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Co. (ATSF), the individual petitioners were… Held: The Court of Appeals' holding that §510 bars interference only with vested rights is contradicted by §510's plain language, whose use of the word "plan'' all but forecloses that position.

* In the sentencing phase of the trial at which petitioner Lambrix was convicted on two counts of first-degree murder, the Florida… Held: 1.Although the question whether a federal court should resolve a claim of procedural bar before considering a claim of Teague bar has not previously been presented, the Court's opinions-most particularly, Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 111 S.Ct. 2546, 115 L.Ed.2d 640-suggest that the procedural bar issue should ordinarily be…

* Respondent Papai was injured while painting the housing structure of the tug Pt. Barrow. Held: 1.Because the issue whether the record permits a reasonable jury to conclude that Papai is a Jones Act seaman is here resolved in the employer's favor, this Court does not reach the question whether an administrative ruling for an employee on his claim of Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act coverage bars his claim of…

* Petitioner, a Maine nonprofit">nonprofit corporation, operates a church camp for children, most of whom are not Maine residents. Petitioner is financed through camper tuition and other revenues. Held: An otherwise generally applicable state property tax violates the Commerce Clause if its exemption for property owned by charitable institutions excludes organizations operated principally for the benefit of nonresidents. Pp. ____-____.

* Respondent, an inmate of a Washington state prison, was found guilty of prison rule infractions and sentenced to, inter alia, the loss of 30… Held: 2.Although a prayer for prospective injunctive relief ordinarily will not "necessarily imply'' the invalidity of a previous loss of good-time credits, and so may properly be brought under §1983, respondent's claim for such relief must be remanded because it was not considered by either lower court, and its validity was neither…

Edmond v. United States, 520 U.S. 651 (1997), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which it held that members of the Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals were "inferior officers" under the Appointments Clause. The court also sought out to define "inferior officers", and generally held that inferior officers were those whose decisions could be reviewed by, and could be removed without cause by, a principal officer who is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

* Respondent pleaded guilty to several federal fraud counts, pursuant to a plea agreement in which the Government agreed to move for dismissal of other charges. Held: In the circumstances presented here, a defendant may not withdraw his plea unless he shows a "fair and just reason'' under Rule 32(e). Nothing in the text of Rule 11, which sets out the prerequisites to accepting a guilty plea and plea agreement, supports the Court of Appeals' holding.

Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case establishing that a sitting President of the United States has no immunity from civil law litigation, in federal court, for acts done before taking office and unrelated to the office. In particular, there is no temporary immunity and thus no delay of federal cases until the President leaves office.

* Petitioner Suitum owns an undeveloped lot near Lake Tahoe. Held: Suitum's regulatory taking claim is ripe for adjudication. Pp. ____. (a) Suitum must satisfy the prudential ripeness principle requiring that she receive a "final decision'' from the agency regarding the application of its regulations to her property. Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v.

* Title 28 U.S.C. §994(h) directs the United States Sentencing Commission to "assure'' that its Sentencing Guidelines specify a prison sentence "at or near the maximum term authorized for categories… Held: Amendment 506 is inconsistent with §994(h)'s plain and unambiguous language and therefore must give way. Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36, 38, 113 S.Ct. 1913, 1915, 123 L.Ed.2d 598.

* After spending six years on Alabama's death row, petitioner's capital murder conviction was reversed on the ground that the State had suppressed exculpatory evidence. Held: Alabama sheriffs, when executing their law enforcement duties, represent the State of Alabama, not their counties. Pp. ____-____.

* New York's Health Facility Assessment (HFA) imposes a tax on gross receipts for patient services at, inter alia, diagnostic and treatment centers. Held: Section 514(a) does not preclude New York from imposing a gross receipts tax on ERISA funded medical centers. Pp. ____-____. (a) When the Second Circuit initially found the HFA pre-empted, it relied substantially on an expansive and literal interpretation of the words "relate to'' in §514(a).

* The Tax Injunction Act (Act) restricts the federal district courts' power to prevent collection or enforcement of state taxes, but makes an exception to that jurisdictional bar where no plain,… Held: PCA's are not included within the judicial exception to the Act by virtue of their designation as instrumentalities of the United States and so may not sue in federal court for an injunction against state taxation without the United States as co-plaintiff. Pp. ____-____.

Boggs v. Boggs, 520 U.S. 833 (1997), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a spouse that is not a participant in an ERISA account cannot will part or all of it before distribution of the pension plan.

* In East River S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval Inc., 476 U.S. 858, 106 S.Ct. 2295, 90 L.Ed.2d 865, this Court held that an admiralty tort plaintiff cannot recover for the physical damage a… Held: Equipment added by the Initial User before he sold the ship to the Subsequent User is "other property,'' not part of the product that itself caused physical harm.

* Petitioner was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death before then-Judge Thomas J. Maloney, an Illinois judge who was later convicted on… Held: inter alia, that petitioner had not shown "good cause'' for discovery to prove his claim, as required by Rule 6(a) of the Rules Governing §2254 Cases. Held: Petitioner has made a sufficient factual showing, under Habeas Corpus Rule 6(a), to establish "good cause'' for discovery on his claim of actual judicial bias in his case.

* Respondent filed this 42 U.S.C. §1983 damages action in Idaho state court, alleging that the termination of her state employment by petitioner officials deprived her of property without due process… Held: Defendants in a state-court §1983 action do not have a federal right to an interlocutory appeal from a denial of qualified immunity. Pp. ____-____.

* On August 26, 1992, while employed as a policeman at East Stroudsburg University (ESU), a Pennsylvania state institution, respondent was arrested by State Police and charged with a drug felony. Held: In the circumstances here, the State did not violate due process by failing to provide notice and a hearing before suspending a tenured public employee without pay. Pp. ____-____. (a) In Cleveland Bd. of Ed. v.

* In 1989, respondent Schumer filed an action against petitioner Hughes Aircraft Company under the qui tam provision of the False Claims Act (FCA), which permits, in certain circumstances, suits by… Held: Because the 1986 amendment does not apply retroactively to qui tam suits regarding allegedly false claims submitted prior to its enactment, this action should have been dismissed, as required by the pre-1986 version of the FCA. Pp. ____-____.

* Petitioner Associates Commercial Corporation (ACC) holds a loan and lien on a tractor truck purchased by respondent Elray Rash for use in his freight-hauling business. Held: Under §506(a), the value of property retained because the debtor has exercised Chapter 13's "cram down'' option is the cost the debtor would incur to obtain a like asset for the same proposed use. Pp. ____-____.

Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968 (1997), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a Montana law permitting only licensed physicians to perform abortions. The Court summarily reversed a ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that had held that the law was likely intended to inhibit abortion access. In a per curiam opinion, a majority of the Court found that there was no evidence that the Montana legislature acted with an invalid intent. The Court also reiterated its earlier holding in Planned Parenthood v. Casey that the states have broad flexibility to regulate abortion so long as their regulations do not create an undue burden on a woman's right to choose.