Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: us supreme court Year: 2003 Page 3 of about 67 results (0.069 seconds)

Apr 21 2003 (FN)

Price Vs. Vincent

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-21-2003

price v. vincent - 538 u.s. 634 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus price, warden v. vincent certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit no. 02-524. argued april 21, 2003-decided may 19,2003 at respondent's trial on an open murder charge, defense counsel moved, at the close of the prosecution's case in chief and outside the jury's hearing, for a directed verdict of acquittal as to first-degree murder. the trial judge stated that second-degree murder was "'an appropriate charge,'" 292 f.3d 506 , 508, but agreed to hear the prosecutor's statement on first-degree murder the next morning. when the prosecution made the statement, defense counsel objected, arguing that the court had granted its directed verdict motion the previous day, and that further prosecution on first-degree murder would violate the double jeopardy clause. the judge responded that he had granted the motion but had not directed a verdict, and noted that the jury had not been told of his statement. he subsequently submitted the first-degree murder charge to the jury, which convicted respondent on that charge. the michigan court of appeals reversed, concluding that the double jeopardy clause prevented respondent's prosecution for first-degree murder. reversing in turn, the state supreme court determined that the trial judge's comments were not sufficiently final to terminate jeopardy. respondent then notified the court of a docket sheet entry stating: "'1 open murder to 2nd degree .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 2003 (FN)

Desert Palace, Inc. Vs. Costa

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-21-2003

desert palace, inc. v. costa - 539 u.s. 90 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus desert palace, inc., dba caesars palace hotel & casino v. costa certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 02-679. argued april 21, 2003-decided june 9,2003 title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 makes it an "unlawful employment practice for an employer ... to discriminate against any individual ... , because of ... sex." 42 u. s. c. 2000e-2(a)(1). in price waterhouse v. hopkins, 490 u. s. 228 , this court considered whether an employment decision is made "because of" sex in a "mixed-motive" case, i. e., where both legitimate and illegitimate reasons motivated the decision. although the court concluded that an employer had an affirmative defense if it could prove that it would have made the same decision had gender not played a role, it was divided on the question of when the burden of proof shifts to an employer to prove the defense. justice o'connor, concurring in the judgment, concluded that the burden would shift only where a disparate treatment plaintiff could show by "direct evidence that an illegitimate criterion was a substantial factor in the [employment] decision." id., at 276. congress subsequently passed the civil rights act of 1991 (1991 act), which provides, among other things, that (1) an unlawful employment practice is established "when the complaining party demonstrates that ... sex ... was a motivating factor for any employment practice, even .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 2003 (FN)

Clackamas Gastroenterology Associates, P. C. Vs. Wells

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-22-2003

clackamas gastroenterology associates, p. c. v. wells - 538 u.s. 440 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus clackamas gastroenterology associates, p. c. v. wells certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 01-1435. argued february 25, 2003-decided april 22, 2003 respondent filed suit alleging that petitioner medical clinic violated the americans with disabilities act of 1990 (ada or act) when it terminated her employment. petitioner moved for summary judgment, asserting that it was not covered by the act because it did not have 15 or more employees for the 20 weeks required by the ada. that assertion's accuracy depends on whether the four physician-shareholders who own the professional corporation and constitute its board of directors are counted as employees. in granting the motion, the district court concluded that the physicians were more analogous to partners in a partnership than to shareholders in a corporation and therefore were not employees under the ada. the ninth circuit reversed, finding no reason to permit a professional corporation to reap the tax and civil liability advantages of its corporate status and then argue that it is like a partnership so as to avoid employment discrimination liability. held: 1. the common-law element of control is the principal guidepost to be followed in deciding whether the four director-shareholder physicians in this case should be counted as "employees." where, as here, a statute does not helpfully .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 2003 (FN)

Jinks Vs. Richland County

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-22-2003

jinks v. richland county - 538 u.s. 456 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus jinks v. richland county, south carolina, et al. certiorari to the supreme court of south carolina no. 02-258. argued march 5, 2003-decided april 22, 2003 title 28 u. s. c. 1367 determines whether a federal district court with jurisdiction over a civil action may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over other claims forming part of the same article iii "case or controversy." if the court declines to exercise such jurisdiction, the claims will be dismissed and must be refiled in state court. to prevent the limitations period on those claims from expiring while they are pending in federal court, 1367(d) requires state courts to toll the period while a supplemental claim is pending in federal court and for 30 days after its dismissal unless state law provides for a longer tolling period. petitioner filed a federal-court action claiming that richland county (hereinafter respondent) and others violated 42 u. s. c. 1983 in connection with her husband's death. she also asserted supplemental claims for wrongful death and survival under south carolina law. the district court granted defendants summary judgment on the 1983 claim and declined to exercise jurisdiction over the state-law claims. petitioner then filed the supplemental claims in state court and won a wrongfuldeath verdict against respondent. the state supreme court reversed, finding the state-law claims time barred. although they would not have been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2003 (FN)

Massaro Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-23-2003

massaro v. united states - 538 u.s. 500 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus massaro v. united states certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the second circuit no. 01-1559. argued february 25, 2003-decided april 23, 2003 petitioner massaro was indicted on federal racketeering charges in connection with a murder. the day before his trial began, prosecutors learned of a bullet allegedly recovered from the car in which the victim's body was found, but did not inform defense counsel until the trial was underway. defense counsel more than once declined the trial court's offer of a continuance so the bullet could be examined. massaro was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. on direct appeal his new counsel argued that the district court had erred in admitting the bullet in evidence, but did not raise an ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel claim. the second circuit affirmed. massaro later moved to vacate his conviction under 28 u. s. c. 2255, claiming, as relevant here, that his trial counsel had rendered ineffective assistance in failing to accept the trial court's offer of a continuance. the district court found his claim procedurally defaulted because he could have raised it on direct appeal. in affirming, the second circuit adhered to its precedent that, when the defendant is represented by new counsel on appeal and the ineffective-assistance claim is based solely on the trial record, the claim must be raised on direct appeal; failure to do so results .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2003 (FN)

Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. Vs. Hyatt

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-23-2003

franchise tax bd. of cal. v. hyatt - 538 u.s. 488 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus franchise tax board of california v. hyatt etal. certiorari to the supreme court of nevada no. 02-42. argued february 24, 2003-decided april 23, 2003 respondent hyatt's (hereinafter respondent) "part-year" 1991 california income-tax return represented that he had ceased to be a california resident and had become a nevada resident in october 1991, shortly before he received substantial licensing fees. petitioner california franchise tax board (cftb) determined that he was a california resident until april 1992, and accordingly issued notices of proposed assessments for 1991 and 1992 and imposed substantial civil fraud penalties. respondent filed suit against cftb in a nevada state court, alleging that cftb had directed numerous contacts at nevada and had committed negligence and intentional torts during the course of its audit of respondent. in its motion for summary judgment or dismissal, cftb argued that the state court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because full faith and credit and other legal principles required that the court apply california law immunizing cftb from suit. upon denial of that motion, cftb petitioned the nevada supreme court for a writ of mandamus ordering dismissal. the latter court ultimately granted the petition in part and denied it in part, holding that the lower court should have declined to exercise its jurisdiction over the underlying negligence claim under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 2003 (FN)

Demore Vs. Kim

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-29-2003

demore v. kim - 538 u.s. 510 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus demore, district director, san francisco district of immigration and naturalization service, et al. v. kim certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 01-1491. argued january 15, 2003-decided april 29, 2003 under the immigration and nationality act, 8 u. s. c. 1226(c), "[t]he attorney general shall take into custody any alien who" is removable from this country because he has been convicted of one of a specified set of crimes, including an "aggravated felony." mter respondent, a lawful permanent resident alien, was convicted in state court of first-degree burglary and, later, of "petty theft with priors," the immigration and naturalization service (ins) charged him with being deportable from the united states in light of these convictions, and detained him pending his removal hearing. without disputing the validity of his convictions or the ins' conclusion that he is deportable and therefore subject to mandatory detention under 1226(c), respondent filed a habeas corpus action challenging 1226(c) on the ground that his detention thereunder violated due process because the ins had made no determination that he posed either a danger to society or a flight risk. the district court agreed and granted respondent's petition subject to the ins' prompt undertaking of an individualized bond hearing, after which respondent was released on bond. in affirming, the ninth circuit held that 1226(c .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 2003 (FN)

Roell Vs. Withrow

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-29-2003

roell v. withrow - 538 u.s. 580 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus roell et al. v. withrow certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit no. 02-69. argued february 26, 2003-decided april 29, 2003 the federal magistrate act of 1979 (act) empowers full-time magistrate judges to conduct "any or all proceedings in a jury or nonjury civil matter and order the entry of judgment in the case," as long as they are "specially designated ... by the district court" and acting with "the consent of the parties." 28 u. s. c. 636(c)(1). respondent withrow, a state prisoner, brought an action under 42 u. s. c. 1983 against members of the prison's medical staff, petitioners roell, garibay, and reagan, alleging that they had deliberately disregarded his medical needs in violation of the eighth amendment. during a preliminary hearing, the magistrate judge told withrow that he could choose to have her rather than the district judge preside over the entire case. withrow agreed orally and later in writing, but the petitioners did not at that point give their consent. without waiting for their decision, the district judge referred the case to the magistrate judge for final disposition, but with the caveat that all petitioners would have an opportunity to consent to her jurisdiction, and that the referral order would be vacated if any of them did not consent. only reagan gave written consent to the referral; roell and garibay said nothing about the referral. the case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 2003 (FN)

Fitzgerald Vs. Racing Assn. of Central Iowa

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-29-2003

fitzgerald v. racing assn. of central iowa - 539 u.s. 103 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus fitzgerald, treasurer of iowa v. racing association of central iowa et al. certiorari to the supreme court of iowa no. 02-695. argued april 29, 2003-decided june 9,2003 an iowa law that, among other things, authorized racetracks to operate slot machines and imposed a graduated tax upon racetrack slot machine adjusted revenues, with a top rate that started at 20 percent and would automatically rise over time to 36 percent, left a 20 percent tax rate on riverboat slot machine adjusted revenues in place. respondents, racetracks and a dog owners' association, filed a state-court suit challenging the law on the ground that the 20 percent/36 percent tax rate difference violated the equal protection clause, u. s. const., arndt. 14, 1. the district court upheld the statute, but the iowa supreme court reversed. held: 1. this court has jurisdiction to review the state court's judgment, which does not rest independently upon state law. the state court's opinion says that iowa courts should apply the same analysis in considering either state or federal equal protection claims. in such circumstances, this court considers a state-court decision as resting upon federal grounds sufficient to support jurisdiction. p. 106. 2. iowa's differential tax rate does not violate the federal equal protection clause. a law, such as iowa's, which distinguishes for tax purposes among revenues obtained within a .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 05 2003 (FN)

illinois Ex Rel. Madigan Vs. Telemarketing Associates, Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-05-2003

illinois ex rel. madigan v. telemarketing associates, inc. - 538 u.s. 600 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus illinois ex rel. madigan, attorney general of illinois v. telemarketing associates, inc., et al. certiorari to the supreme court of illinois no. 01-1806. argued march 3, 2003-decided may 5, 2003 respondents, illinois for-profit fundraising corporations and their owner (collectively telemarketers), were retained by vietnow national headquarters, a charitable nonprofit corporation, to solicit donations to aid vietnam veterans. the contracts between those parties provided, among other things, that telemarketers would retain 85 percent of the gross receipts from illinois donors, leaving 15 percent for vietnow. the illinois attorney general filed a complaint in state court, alleging, inter alia, that telemarketers represented to donors that a significant amount of each dollar donated would be paid over to vietnow for specifically identified charitable endeavors, and that such representations were knowingly deceptive and materially false, constituted a fraud, and were made for telemarketers' private pecuniary benefit. the trial court granted telemarketers' motion to dismiss the fraud claims on first amendment grounds. in affirming, the illinois appellate and supreme courts placed heavy weight on schaumburg v. citizens for a better environment, 444 u. s. 620 , secretary of state of md. v. joseph h. munson co., 467 u. s. 947 , and riley v. national federation of blind of n. c .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //