United States Reports
606 volumes · 104,521 opinions
4,420 opinions in United States Reports with a Wikipedia-sourced synopsis — the cases notable enough that someone wrote an encyclopedia article about them.
- Central Bank of Denver Na v. First Interstate Bank of Denver Na K (1994)511 U.S. 164
Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, 511 U.S. 164 (1994), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held private plaintiffs may not maintain aiding and abetting suits under Securities Exchange Act § 10(b).
- Stansbury v. California (1994)511 U.S. 318
Stansbury v. California, 511 U.S. 318 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether a police officer's subjective and undisclosed opinion whether a person who had been questioned was a suspect was relevant in determining whether that person had been in custody and thus entitled to the Miranda warnings. In a 9–0 ruling, the Court reversed and remanded the case. In a per curiam decision, the Court held that "an officer's subjective and undisclosed view concerning whether the person being interrogated is a suspect is irrelevant to the assessment [of] whether the person is in custody."
- C & a Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown (1994)Held municipal or local ordinance unconstitutional511 U.S. 383
C&A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown, New York, 511 U.S. 383 (1994), was a case before the United States Supreme Court in which the plaintiff, a private recycler with business in Clarkstown, New York, sought to ship its non-recyclable waste to cheaper waste processors out-of-state. Clarkstown opposed the move, and the company then brought suit, raising the unconstitutionality of Clarkstown's "flow control ordinance," which required solid wastes that were not recyclable or hazardous to be deposited at a particular private company's transfer facility. The ordinance involved fees that were above market rates. The Supreme Court sided with the plaintiff, concluding that Clarkstown's ordinance violated the Dormant Commerce Clause.
- Dalton v. Specter (1994)511 U.S. 462
Dalton v. Specter, 511 U.S. 462 (1994), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that an Executive Order to shut down the Philadelphia Naval Base was not subject to judicial review. In an opinion written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the Court held that the decision to close the base was not subject to review under the Administrative Procedure Act because the decision to close the base did not constitute the final action of an agency. Additionally, the Court held that the decision to close the base, which was made under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, was not subject to judicial review because the 1990 Act "commits decisionmaking to the discretion of the President".
- Staples v. United States (1994)511 U.S. 600
United States v. Olofson, 563 F.3d 652 (2009), is an appellate decision in the case of David Olofson, who was convicted by a jury of knowingly transferring a machine gun in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o). Olofson was sentenced to thirty months in prison, which he began serving after his appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit failed. The US Supreme Court declined to hear a further appeal. Olofson's case was, for a time, a minor cause célèbre in conservative media and among gun rights advocates, attracting support from, among others, Lou Dobbs of CNN and from Oath Keepers, and legal assistance from Gun Owners of America.
- Waters v. Churchill (1994)511 U.S. 661
Waters v. Churchill, 511 U.S. 661 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case concerning the First Amendment rights of public employees in the workplace. By a 7–2 margin the justices held that it was not necessary to determine what a nurse at a public hospital had actually said while criticizing a supervisor's staffing practices to coworkers, as long as the hospital had formed a reasonable belief as to the content of her remarks and reasonably believed that they could be disruptive to its operations. They vacated a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in her favor, and ordered the case remanded to district court to determine instead if the nurse had been fired for the speech or other reasons, per the Court's ruling two decades prior in Mt.
- Pud No. 1 of Jefferson County v. Washington Department of Ecology (1994)511 U.S. 700
PUD No. 1 of Jefferson County v. Washington Department of Ecology, 511 U.S. 700 (1994), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court that interpreted section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The case involved an application by the Jefferson County Public Utility District and Tacoma City Light in northwestern Washington to build a hydropower facility on the Dosewallips River, first proposed in 1982 and known as the "Elkhorn Dam" project. The Washington State Department of Ecology issued a certification to the project in 1986 that imposed minimum water flow requirements to protect species of salmon and steelhead under the federal Clean Water Act.
- Nichols v. United States (1994)Altered precedent511 U.S. 738
Nichols v. United States, 511 U.S. 738 (1994), was a United States Supreme Court case that ruled that an uncounseled misdemeanor conviction, which resulted in a punishment other than imprisonment, can be used to enhance a sentence for a subsequent offense.
Overruled Baldasar v. Illinois (1980) - Farmer v. Brennan (1994)511 U.S. 825
Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a prison official's "deliberate indifference" to a substantial risk of serious harm to an inmate violates the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment. Farmer built on two previous Supreme Court decisions addressing prison conditions, Estelle v. Gamble and Wilson v. Seiter. The decision marked the first time the Supreme Court directly addressed sexual assault in prisons.
- Weiss United States (1994)510 U.S. 163
Weiss v. United States, 510 U.S. 163 (1994), is a Supreme Court of the United States case which held that commissioned military officers, who are appointed by the president of the United States by and with the advice and consent of the United States Senate, may be assigned to act as military judges without the need to be confirmed a second time by the Senate.
- National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler (1994)510 U.S. 249
National Organization for Women v. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) could apply to enterprises without economic motives; anti-abortion protesters could thus be prosecuted under it. An organization without an economic motive can still affect interstate or foreign commerce and thus satisfy the Act's definition of a racketeering enterprise.
- Albright v. Oliver (1994)510 U.S. 266
Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266 (1994), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that there is no substantive due process violation that creates liability under Section 1983 when the police arrests someone for conduct that is not unlawful. It was a plurality decision.
- Fogerty Fantasy Inc (1994)510 U.S. 517
Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994), was a United States Supreme Court case that addressed the standards governing awards of attorneys' fees in copyright cases. The Copyright Act of 1976 authorizes, but does not require, the court to award attorneys' fees to "the prevailing party" in a copyright action. In Fogerty, the Court held that such attorneys'-fees awards are discretionary, and that the same standards should be applied in the case of a prevailing plaintiff and a prevailing defendant.
- Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994)510 U.S. 569
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994), was a United States Supreme Court copyright law case that established that a commercial parody can qualify as fair use. This case established that the fact that money is made by a work does not make it impossible for fair use to apply; it is merely one of the components of a fair use analysis.
- Day v. Day (1993)510 U.S. 1
This is a list of all United States Supreme Court cases from volume 510 of the United States Reports:
- Florence County School District Four v. Carter Ex Rel. Carter (1993)510 U.S. 7
Florence County School District Four v. Carter, 510 U.S. 7 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, in certain circumstances, a court may order that parents be reimbursed for unilaterally withdrawing disabled children from schools that do not comply with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
- Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. (1993)510 U.S. 17
Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993), is a US labor law case in which the Supreme Court of the United States clarified the definition of a "hostile" or "abusive" work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Court held that a determination about whether a work environment is hostile or abusive requires a consideration of all relevant circumstances.
- Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District (1993)509 U.S. 1
Zobrest v. Catalina Foothills School District, 509 U.S. 1 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a school must continue to provide an interpreter under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act even if the child elects to attend a religious school; to do so does not violate the Establishment Clause.
- Helling v. McKinney (1993)509 U.S. 25
Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that imprisoned people do not need to be actively experiencing injuries from their confinement conditions before challenging them as cruel and unusual punishment.
- Darby v. Cisneros (1993)509 U.S. 137
Darby v. Cisneros, 509 U.S. 137 (1993), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that federal courts cannot require that a plaintiff exhaust his administrative remedies before seeking judicial review when exhaustion of remedies is not required by either administrative rules or statute.
- Sale v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc. (1993)509 U.S. 155
Sale v. Haitian Centers Council, 509 U.S. 155 (1993), is a case that the U.S. Supreme Court decided on June 21, 1993. The Court ruled that the President's executive order requiring all aliens intercepted on the high seas to be repatriated was not limited by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 or Article 33 of the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
- Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (1993)509 U.S. 209
Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court required that an antitrust plaintiff alleging predatory pricing must show not only changes in market conditions adverse to its interests, as a threshold matter, but must show on the merits that (1) the prices complained of are below an appropriate measure of its rival's costs, and (2) that the competitor had a reasonable prospect or a "dangerous probability" of recouping its investment in the alleged scheme.
- Godinez v. Moran (1993)509 U.S. 389
Godinez v. Moran, 509 U.S. 389 (1993), is a landmark decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that if a defendant was competent to stand trial, they were automatically competent to plead guilty, and thereby waive the panoply of trial rights, including the right to counsel.
- TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp. (1993)509 U.S. 443
TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp., 509 U.S. 443 (1993), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, which upheld the decision of the West Virginia state court awarding $19,000 in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages to the plaintiff. Although multiple justices recognized that the punitive damages were 526 times the compensatory damages, the Court held a "general concern of reasonableness" should guide courts in determining constitutionally acceptable damages under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks (1993)509 U.S. 502
St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (1993), was a US labor law case before the United States Supreme Court on the burden of proof and the relevance of intent for race discrimination.
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993)509 U.S. 579
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (/ˈdɔːbərt/ DAW-bərt), 509 U.S. 579 (1993), is a United States Supreme Court case determining the standard for admitting expert testimony in federal courts. In Daubert, the Court held that the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence implicitly overturned the Frye standard; the standard that the Court articulated is referred to as the Daubert standard.
- Austin v. United States (1993)509 U.S. 602
Austin v. United States, 509 U.S. 602 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution applies to civil forfeiture cases.
- Shaw v. Reno (1993)509 U.S. 630
Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in the area of redistricting and racial gerrymandering. After the 1990 census, North Carolina qualified to have a 12th district and drew it in a distinct snake-like manner to create a "majority-minority" Black district. From there, Ruth O. Shaw sued to challenge this proposed plan with the argument that this 12th district was unconstitutional and violated the Fourteenth Amendment under the Equal Protection Clause. In contrast, Janet Reno, the Attorney General, argued that the district would allow for minority groups to have a voice in elections.
- United States v. Dixon (1993)Altered precedent509 U.S. 688
United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688 (1993), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court concerning double jeopardy. The case overruled Grady v. Corbin (1990) and revived the traditional Blockburger standard. The case held that subsequent convictions for offenses that contained the same elements were violative of the Double Jeopardy Clause.
Overruled Grady v. Corbin (1990) - Hartford Fire Insurance Co v. California Merrett Underwriting Agency Management Limited (1993)509 U.S. 764
Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California, 509 U.S. 764 (1993), was a controversial United States Supreme Court case which held that foreign companies acting in foreign countries could nevertheless be held liable for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act if they conspired to restrain trade within the United States, and succeeded in doing so.
- United States v. IDAHO Ex Rel. DIRECTOR, IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES (1993)508 U.S. 1
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 508 of the United States Reports:
- Stinson v. United States (1993)508 U.S. 36
Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court that held Sentencing Commission guidelines may be cited as binding authority when courts issue sentences for criminal defendants.
- Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Sac & Fox Nation (1993)508 U.S. 114
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Sac & Fox Nation, 508 U.S. 114 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that absent explicit congressional direction to the contrary, it must be presumed that a State does not have jurisdiction to tax tribal members who live and work in Indian country, whether the particular territory consists of a formal or informal reservation, allotted lands, or dependent Indian communities.
- United States Department of Justice v. Landano (1993)508 U.S. 165
Department of Justice v. Landano, 508 U.S. 165 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the government is not entitled to a presumption that a source is confidential within the meaning of Exemption 7(D) of the Freedom of Information Act whenever the source provides information to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the course of a criminal investigation.
- Smith v. United States (1993)508 U.S. 223
Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223 (1993), is a United States Supreme Court case that held that the exchange of a gun for drugs constituted "use" of the firearm for purposes of a federal statute imposing penalties for "use" of a firearm "during and in relation to" a drug trafficking crime.
- Mertens v. Hewitt Associates (1993)508 U.S. 248
Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U.S. 248 (1993), is the second in the trilogy of United States Supreme Court ERISA preemption cases that effectively denies any remedy for employees who are harmed by medical malpractice or other bad acts of their health plan if they receive their health care from their employer.
- Nobelman v. American Savings Bank (1993)508 U.S. 324
Nobelman v. American Savings Bank, 508 U.S. 324 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court disallowed cram-downs (the involuntary imposition by a court of a reorganization plan over the objections of creditors in a bankruptcy proceeding) for primary residences. Michael J. Schroeder argued on behalf of the mortgage creditor, American Savings Bank.
- Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993)508 U.S. 366
Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (1993), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court unanimously held that, when a police officer who is conducting a lawful patdown search for weapons feels something that plainly is contraband, the object may be seized even though it is not a weapon. By a 6-to-3 vote, however, the court held that the officer in this case had gone beyond the limits of a lawful patdown search before he could determine that the object was contraband, making the search and the subsequent seizure unlawful under the Fourth Amendment. Associate Justice Byron White gave the opinion of the court.
- Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District (1993)508 U.S. 385
Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 508 U.S. 384 (1993), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States concerning whether the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment was offended by a school district that refused to allow a church access to school premises to show films dealing with family and child-rearing issues faced by parents. In a unanimous decision, the court concluded that it was.
- Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc. (1993)508 U.S. 429
Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc., 508 U.S. 429 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a court reporter is not absolutely immune from damages liability for failing to produce a transcript of a federal criminal trial.
- Wisconsin v. Mitchell (1993)508 U.S. 476
Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that enhanced penalties for hate crimes do not violate criminal defendants' First Amendment rights. It was a landmark precedent pertaining to First Amendment free speech arguments for hate crime legislation. In effect, the Court ruled that a state may consider whether a crime was committed or initially considered due to an intended victim's status in a protected class.
- Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah (1993)Held municipal or local ordinance unconstitutional508 U.S. 520
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an ordinance passed in Hialeah, Florida, forbidding the unnecessary killing of "an animal in a public or private ritual or ceremony not for the primary purpose of food consumption", was unconstitutional.
- South Dakota v. Bourland (1993)508 U.S. 679
South Dakota v. Bourland, 508 U.S. 679 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that Congress specifically abrogated treaty rights with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe as to hunting and fishing rights on reservation lands that were acquired for a reservoir.
- United States v. Nachtigal (1993)507 U.S. 1
This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 507 of the United States Reports:
- Fex v. Michigan (1993)507 U.S. 43
Fex v. Michigan, 507 U.S. 43 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the Interstate Agreement on Detainers's statute of limitation for bringing a case against an incarcerated person who gives notice to a forum state that they are incarcerated in another state begins after the notice letter has been received by the forum state's prosecution.
- Building & Construction Trades Council of the Metropolitan District v. Associated Builders & Contractors of Massachusetts/Rhode Island, Inc. (1993)507 U.S. 218
Building & Construction Trades Council v. Associated Builders & Contractors of Massachusetts/Rhode Island, Inc., 507 U.S. 218 (1993), is a US labor law case, concerning the scope of federal preemption against state law for labor rights.
- Reno v. Flores (1993)507 U.S. 292
Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993), was a Supreme Court of the United States case that addressed the detention and release of unaccompanied minors.
- Saudi Arabia v. Nelson (1993)507 U.S. 349
Saudi Arabia v. Nelson, 507 U.S. 349 (1993), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered the term "based upon a commercial activity" within the meaning of the first clause of 1605(a)(2) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976.
- City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc. (1993)Held municipal or local ordinance unconstitutional507 U.S. 410
Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc., 507 U.S. 410 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a ban by the city of Cincinnati, on the distribution of commercial material via news racks, violated the First Amendment.
- Arave v. Creech (1993)507 U.S. 463
Arave v. Creech, 507 U.S. 463 (1993), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that, when a state uses a consistent narrowing definition for a broad term like "utter disregard," the broad term can function as a valid aggravating circumstance under the Fourteenth Amendment.