Volume 550 — United States Reports

Watters v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., 550 U.S. 1 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the mortgage business of a nationally chartered bank, whether conducted by the bank itself or through the bank's operating subsidiary, is subject to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's superintendence, and not to the licensing, reporting, and visitorial regimes of the several states in which the subsidiary operates.

Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. v. Metrophones Telecommunications, Inc., 550 U.S. 45 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that payphone operators have a private right to sue telephone carriers for failure to pay reimbursement required by the FCC under the Communications Act of 1934.

The Federal Impact Aid Program provides financial assistance to local school districts whose ability to finance public school education is ad versely affected by a federal presence. Held: The statute permits the Secretary to identify the school districts that should be “disregard[ed]” by looking to the number of the district’s pupils as well as to the size of the district’s expenditures per pupil. Pp. 89–100.

Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. The case reached the high court after U.S. Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, appealed a ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in favor of LeRoy Carhart that struck down the Act. Also before the Supreme Court was the consolidated appeal of Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, whose ruling had the same effect as that of the Eighth Circuit.

James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (2007), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that attempted burglary could serve as a predicate felony under the federal Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), which provided that a person convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm with three prior convictions for either serious drug offenses or violent felonies must be sentenced to a mandatory minimum 15-year prison term.

Petitioner Abdul-Kabir (fka Cole) was convicted of capital murder. Held: Because there is a reasonable likelihood that the state trial court’s instructions prevented jurors from giving meaningful consideration to constitutionally relevant mitigating evidence, the CCA’s merits adjudi cation “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an un reasonable application of, clearly established…

Petitioner Brewer was convicted of murder committed during the course of a robbery. Held: Because the Texas capital sentencing statute, as interpreted by the CCA, impermissibly prevented Brewer’s jury from giving meaningful consideration and effect to constitutionally relevant mitigating evidence, the CCA’s decision denying Brewer relief under Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.

Smith v. Texas, 550 U.S. 297 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case about a challenge to a Texas death penalty court procedure. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the opinion of the Court, holding 5-4 that the Texas procedure was improper. Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissent.

United Haulers Ass'n v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Authority, 550 U.S. 330 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case about interstate commerce. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion of the Court, holding that New York county ordinances forcing private waste management companies to deliver waste to a public facility did not discriminate against interstate commerce. Justice Samuel Alito wrote a dissent.

Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving a lawsuit against a sheriff's deputy brought by a motorist who was paralyzed after the officer ran his eluding vehicle off the road during a high-speed car chase.

KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States concerning the issue of obviousness as applied to patent claims.

Under 26 U. S. C. § 7426(a)(1), if the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) levies upon a third party’s property to collect taxes owed by another, the third… Held: The Trust missed § 7426(a)(1)’s deadline for challenging a levy, and may not bring the challenge as a tax-refund claim under § 1346(a)(1). Section 7426(a)(1) provides the exclusive remedy for third-party wrong ful levy claims. “[A] precisely drawn, detailed statute pre-empts more general remedies,” Brown v. GSA, 425 U.

Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Supreme Court reversed a previous decision by the Federal Circuit and ruled in favor of Microsoft, holding that Microsoft was not liable for infringement on AT&T's patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(f).

Schriro v. Landrigan, 550 U.S. 465 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case decided on May 14, 2007. In a 5–4 decision written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court held that the District Court had not abused its discretion when it refused to grant an evidentiary hearing to convicted murderer Jeffrey Timothy Landrigan who had instructed his defense counsel not to put on any mitigation case during the sentencing phase of a capital murder trial. In doing so, the Supreme Court also reversed the prior ruling to the contrary by the en banc United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which had held that Landrigan was entitled to habeas relief on the grounds that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel.

Hinck v. United States, 550 U.S. 501 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Tax Court is the exclusive forum for judicial review of claims about interest abatement under the Internal Revenue Code.

After his discharge from employment with former Senator Dayton, appel lee Hanson sued appellant, the Senator’s office (Office), invoking… Held: This Court lacks jurisdiction under § 412 because neither the dis missal denial nor the D. C. Circuit’s affirmance can fairly be character ized as a ruling “upon the constitutionality” of any Act provision. The District Court’s order does not state any grounds for decision, so it cannot be characterized as a constitutional holding.

Winkelman v. Parma City School District, 550 U.S. 516 (2007), is a civil suit under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. Justice Kennedy held for the seven-justice majority that parents may file suit under IDEA pro se. Justice Kennedy declined to reach the question whether parents may represent the interests of their children pro se, instead concluding that IDEA created a set of independently enforceable rights in parents.

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States involving antitrust law and civil procedure. The court's opinion, authored by Justice David Souter, established that parallel conduct, absent evidence of agreement, is insufficient to sustain an antitrust action under Section 1 of the Sherman Act. It also heightened the pleading requirement for federal civil cases by requiring plaintiffs to include enough facts in their complaint to make it plausible, not merely possible or conceivable, that they will be able to prove facts to support their claims. The latter change in the law has been met with a great deal of controversy in legal circles, as evidenced by the dissenting opinion from Justice John Paul Stevens.

The District Court dismissed respondent’s first federal habeas petition without prejudice on the ground that his state postconviction proceed ings were not exhausted while he had a… Held: The petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted. The District Court erred in dismissing respondent’s first ha beas petition, which was fully exhausted and did not become unex hausted upon his decision to seek certiorari, see Lawrence v. Florida, 549 U. S. 327.

Held: The deputies did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Officers exe cuting a search warrant may take reasonable action to secure the prem ises and to ensure their own safety and the efficacy of the search. Upon encountering respondents, the deputies acted reasonably to secure the premises. The presence of one race did not eliminate the possibility that suspects of a different race were in the residence as well.

Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), is an employment discrimination decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. The result was that employers could not be sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 over race or gender pay discrimination if the claims were based on decisions made by the employer 180 days or more before the claim. Justice Alito held for the five-justice majority that each paycheck received did not constitute a discrete discriminatory act, even if it was affected by a prior decision outside the time limit. Ledbetter's claim of the "paycheck accrual rule" was rejected.