Volume 552 — United States Reports

New York City Board of Education v. Tom F., 552 U.S. 1 (2007), is a legal case in the United States. The case involves the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and tuition reimbursement. The case was granted certiorari by the Supreme Court. Oral arguments took place October 1, 2007. The Court ruled in favor of Tom F. nine days later, on October 10, 2007, affirming the appellate court's decision with a 4–4 split. The decision did not list which justices voted which way, except that Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy did not take part. Note that as a majority of justices failed to adopt an opinion in favor of either the school district or the student, the decision of the lower appellate court, permitting tuition reimbursement, remained unaltered.

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down six per curiam opinions during its 2007 term, which began October 1, 2007 and concluded September 30, 2008.

CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Ga. State Board of Equalization, 552 U.S. 9 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (4-R Act) allows a railroad to attempt to show that state methods for determining the value of railroad property result in a discriminatory determination of true market value.

Logan v. United States, 552 U.S. 23 (2007), was a case before the United States Supreme Court in which the court held that the "civil rights restored" exemption of convictions for sentence-enhancement purposes did not extend to a defendant who retained his civil rights at all times, and whose post-conviction legal status remained in all respects unaltered by any state dispensation..

Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the federal appeals courts may not presume that a sentence falling outside the range recommended by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines is unreasonable. Applying this rule to the case at hand, it upheld a sentence of 36 months' probation imposed on a man who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute ecstasy in the face of a recommended sentence of 30 to 37 months in prison.

Watson v. United States, 552 U.S. 74 (2007), is a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court had earlier held in Smith v. United States (1993) that the exchange of a gun for drugs constituted "use" of a firearm for purposes of a federal statute imposing penalties for "use" of a firearm "during and in relation to" a drug trafficking crime; in Watson, the court decided that a transaction in the opposite direction does not violate the same statute (i.e., Smith holds that one "uses" a gun by giving it in exchange for drugs, and Watson holds that one does not "use" a gun by receiving it in exchange for drugs).

Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court confirmed that federal district judges utilize, in an advisory (not as law) fashion, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, in cases involving conduct related to possession, distribution, and manufacture of crack cocaine.

Held: Respondent’s motion to vacate and dismiss as moot the Ninth Cir cuit’s judgment, to the extent it addressed his plea bargaining claim, is granted. He wishes to abandon that claim so that he may proceed with the resentencing ordered by the District Court. The Ninth Circuit is directed to instruct the District Court to dismiss the relevant claim with prejudice.

Held: Because this Court’s precedents give no clear answer to the ques tion presented in this case, it cannot be said that the state court unrea sonably applied clearly established federal law, and therefore, § 2254 relief is unauthorized.

John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States, 552 U.S. 130 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an action in the United States Court of Claims must always be timely, even if the government has waived timeliness.

Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta, 552 U.S. 148 (2008), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court pertaining to the scope of liability of secondary actors, such as lawyers and accountants, for securities fraud under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In a 5-3 decision authored by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the Court held that "aiders and abettors" of fraud cannot be held secondarily liable under the private right of action authorized by §10(b) of the Exchange Act. Such defendants can only be held liable if their own conduct satisfies each of the elements for §10(b) liability. Therefore, the plaintiff must prove reliance, in making a decision to acquire or hold a security, upon a material misrepresentation or omission by the defendant.

Knight v. Commissioner, 552 U.S. 181 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that investment advisory fees generally are subject to the 2% tax-deductibility floor when incurred by a trust.

N.Y. State Bd. of Elections v. Lopez Torres, 552 U.S. 196 (2008), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court that involved a constitutional challenge brought against New York State's judicial election law, alleging that it unfairly prevented candidates from obtaining access to the ballot. The Supreme Court rejected this challenge and held that the state's election laws did not infringe upon candidates' First Amendment associational rights. Several concurring justices emphasized, however, that their decision reflected only the constitutionality of the state's election system, and not its wisdom or merit.

Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 552 U.S. 214 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case, upholding the United States's sovereign immunity against tort claims brought when "any law enforcement officer" loses a person's property. It was argued on October 29, 2007, and decided on January 22, 2008, by the Roberts Court.

LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc., 552 U.S. 248 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that, although the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) does not provide a remedy for individual injuries distinct from plan injuries, it does authorize someone with a retirement account to recover from an account manager who commits fiduciary breaches that impair the value of plan assets in that person's individual account.

Danforth v. Minnesota, 552 U.S. 264 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that state courts can retroactively apply a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure in post-conviction proceedings by applying state law retroactivity standards that are broader than the Teague v. Lane standard.

Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312 (2008), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the pre-emption clause of the Medical Device Amendment bars state common-law claims that challenge the effectiveness or safety of a medical device marketed in a form that received premarket approval from the Food and Drug Administration.

Preston v. Ferrer, 552 U.S. 346 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, 8–1, that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) overrules state laws declaring that certain disputes must be resolved by a state administrative agency.

Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association, 552 U.S. 364 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that federal law preempts state law that would control the commercial delivery of tobacco and other products harmful to children.

Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn, 552 U.S. 379 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that whether "me too" evidence of discrimination offered by co-workers in support of a claim against the employer is relevant in an individual Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) case is fact based and depends on many factors; it is not appropriate for reviewing courts to apply per se rules about their admissibility or inadmissibility.

Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on February 27, 2008. The ruling provided guidance on what would constitute an adequate filing under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA).

Boulware v. United States, 552 U.S. 421 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a distributee accused of criminal tax evasion may claim return-of-capital treatment without producing evidence that, when the distribution occurred, either they or the corporation intended to return the capital.

467 F. 3d 85, affirmed by an equally divided Court. Carter G. Phillips argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Daniel E. Troy, Rebecca K. Wood, Eamon P. Joyce, Quin M. Sorenson, David Klingsberg, and Steven Glickstein. Daryl Joseffer argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae urging reversal.

Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party, 552 U.S. 442 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Washington's top-two primary system does not infringe upon smaller political parties' associational rights.

Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case about racial issues in jury selection in death penalty cases. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the 7–2 majority, ruled that the prosecutor's use of peremptory strikes to remove African American jurors violated the Court's earlier holding in Batson v. Kentucky. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented.

Medellín v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 (2008), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court that held even when a treaty constitutes an international commitment, it is not binding domestic law unless it has been implemented by an act of the U.S. Congress or contains language expressing that it is "self-executing" upon ratification. The Court also ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding upon the U.S. and, like treaties, cannot be enforced by the president without authority from Congress or the U.S. Constitution.

Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that state and federal courts cannot, on a motion to vacate or to modify an arbitration award, expand the limited scope of judicial review specified in 9 U.S.C. §§ 10 and 11, including terms that were agreed upon by the parties.

New Jersey v. Delaware, 552 U.S. 597 (2008), is a United States Supreme Court case in which New Jersey sued Delaware, invoking the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1251(a), following Delaware's denial of oil company BP's petition to build a liquefied natural gas pipeline and loading facility on the New Jersey side of the Delaware River. Delaware denied BP's petition because it violated Delaware's Coastal Zone Act. BP then sought New Jersey's approval of the project. Delaware objected because the construction would require dredging of underwater land within Delaware's borders, which extend to the low-tide mark of the New Jersey shore. BP's proposal had not yet passed New Jersey's approval process when New Jersey and BP filed suit against Delaware.