Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: us supreme court Year: 2003 Page 4 of about 67 results (0.102 seconds)

May 05 2003 (FN)

Kaupp Vs. Texas

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-05-2003

kaupp v. texas - 538 u.s. 626 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus kaupp v. texas on petition for writ of certiorari to the court of appeals of texas, fourteenth district no. 02-5636. decided may 5, 2003 mter petitioner kaupp, then 17, was implicated in the murder of a 14year-old girl by the confession of the girl's half brother, detectives tried, but failed, to obtain a warrant to question kaupp. they then went to his house at 3 a.m.; awakened and handcuffed him; led him, shoeless and dressed only in his underwear, to a patrol car; stopped at the crime scene; and took him to the sheriff's headquarters, where they removed the handcuffs and advised him of his rights under miranda v. arizona, 384 u. s. 436 . once presented with the brother's confession, kaupp admitted to having a part in the crime. he did not acknowledge causing the fatal wound or confess to the murder, for which he was later indicted. kaupp moved unsuccessfully to suppress his confession as the fruit of an illegal arrest, was convicted, and was sentenced to prison. in affirming, the texas court of appeals found that the arrest occurred after kaupp's confession; that kaupp consented to go with the officers when he answered "okay" to an officer's statement that they needed to talk; that a reasonable person would not have believed that putting on handcuffs before being removed to a patrol car was a significant restriction on his freedom of movement, since this was common practice of the sheriff's office; and that .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 2003 (FN)

Bunkley Vs. Florida

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-27-2003

bunkley v. florida - 538 u.s. 835 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus bunkley v. florida on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme court of florida no. 02-8636. decided may 27, 2003 petitioner bunkley had a pocketknife with a 2 1 h- to 3-inch blade in his pocket when he was arrested as he left an unoccupied restaurant. he was charged with first-degree burglary because his knife was classified as a "dangerous weapon" under florida law, was convicted, and was sentenced to life in prison. had the pocketknife not been so classified, his sentence could have been no more than five years. his conviction became final in 1989. florida has exempted the "common pocketknife" from its weapons statute since 1901, and the relevant language has remained unchanged. in 1997, in a separate case, the florida supreme court interpreted the meaning of the "common pocketknife" exception for the first time, including a pocketknife with a 3%-inch blade within the exception. l. b. v. state, 700 so. 2d 370, 373. bunkley then moved for state postconviction relief, alleging that his armed robbery conviction was invalid under l. b. because his pocketknife was shorter than 3% inches and could not therefore support a conviction involving weapon possession. the circuit court denied his motion, and the state district court of appeal affirmed. the state supreme court rejected bunkley's claim, holding that l. b. was an evolutionary refinement in the law that did not apply retroactively. held: the florida .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 2003 (FN)

Chavez Vs. Martinez

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-27-2003

chavez v. martinez - 538 u.s. 760 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus chavez v. martinez certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 01-1444. argued december 4, 2002-decided may 27, 2003 while respondent martinez was being treated for gunshot wounds received during an altercation with police, he was interrogated by petitioner chavez, a patrol supervisor. martinez admitted that he used heroin and had taken an officer's gun during the incident. at no point was martinez given miranda warnings. although he was never charged with a crime, and his answers were never used against him in any criminal proceeding, martinez filed a 42 u. s. c. 1983 suit, maintaining, among other things, that chavez's actions violated his fifth amendment right not to be "compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself," and his fourteenth amendment substantive due process right to be free from coercive questioning. the district court ruled that chavez was not entitled to qualified immunity, and the ninth circuit affirmed, finding that chavez's coercive questioning violated martinez's fifth amendment rights even though his statements were not used against him in a criminal proceeding, and that a police officer violates due process when he obtains a confession by coercive conduct, regardless of whether the confession is subsequently used at trial. held: the judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded. 270 f.3d 852 , reversed and remanded. justice thomas, .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 2003 (FN)

National Park Hospitality Assn. Vs. Department of Interior

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-27-2003

national park hospitality assn. v. department of interior - 538 u.s. 803 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus national park hospitality association v. department of the interior et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit no. 02-196. argued march 4, 2003-decided may 27, 2003 the contract disputes act of 1978 (cda) establishes rules governing disputes arising out of certain government contracts. mter congress enacted the national parks omnibus management act of 1998, establishing a comprehensive concession management program for national parks, the national park service (nps) issued implementing regulations including 36 cfr 51.3, which purports to render the cda inapplicable to concession contracts. petitioner concessioners' association challenged 51.3's validity. the district court upheld the regulation, concluding that the cda is ambiguous on whether it applies to concession contracts and finding nps' interpretation reasonable under chevron u. s. a. inc. v. natural resources defense council, inc., 467 u. s. 837 . the district of columbia circuit affirmed, placing no reliance on chevron, but finding nps' reading of the cda consistent with both the cda and the 1998 act. held: the controversy is not yet ripe for judicial resolution. determining whether administrative action is ripe requires evaluation of (1) the issues' fitness for judicial decision and (2) the hardship to the parties of withholding court consideration. abbott .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 2003 (FN)

Black and Decker Disability Plan Vs. Nord

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-27-2003

black & decker disability plan v. nord - 538 u.s. 822 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus black & decker disability plan v. nord certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 02-469. argued april 28, 2003-decided may 27, 2003 petitioner black & decker disability plan (plan), an employee welfare benefit plan governed by the employee retirement income security act of 1974 (erisa), provides benefits for eligible disabled employees of black & decker corporation (black & decker) and certain of its subsidiaries. black & decker is the administrator of the plan but has delegated authority to metropolitan life insurance company (metlife) to render initial recommendations on benefit claims. respondent nord, an employee of a black & decker subsidiary, submitted a claim for disability benefits under the plan, which met life denied. at met life's review stage, nord submitted letters and supporting documentation from his physician, dr. hartman, and a treating orthopedist to whom hartman had referred nord. these treating physicians stated that nord suffered from a degenerative disc disease and chronic pain that rendered him unable to work. black & decker referred nord to a neurologist for an independent examination. the neurologist concluded that, aided by pain medication, nord could perform sedentary work. metlife thereafter made a final recommendation to deny nord's claim, which black & decker accepted. seeking to overturn that determination, nord filed this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 02 2003 (FN)

Beneficial Nat. Bank Vs. Anderson

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-02-2003

beneficial nat. bank v. anderson - 539 u.s. 1 (2003) cases adjudged in the supreme court of the united states at october term, 2002 syllabus beneficial national bank et al. v. anderson et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit no. 02-306. argued april 30, 2003-decided june 2, 2003 respondents, who secured loans from petitioner national bank, filed a state-court suit against the bank and two other petitioners, seeking damages on the theory, among others, that the bank's interest rates violated "the common law usury doctrine" and an alabama usury statute. the complaint did not refer to any federal law. petitioners removed the case to federal district court, asserting that the national bank act governs the interest rate that a national bank may charge, see 12 u. s. c. 85, that the rates charged to respondents complied with 85, that 86 provides the exclusive remedies available against a national bank charging excessive interest, and that respondents' action was therefore one "arising under" federal law that could be removed under 28 u. s. c. 1441. the district court denied respondents' motion to remand the case to state court, but certified the question whether it had jurisdiction to the eleventh circuit. in reversing, the latter court held that under the ''well-pleaded complaint" rule, removal is not permitted unless the complaint expressly alleges a federal claim, and that the narrow exception known as the complete pre-emption doctrine .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 09 2003 (FN)

Nguyen Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-09-2003

nguyen v. united states - 539 u.s. 69 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus nguyen v. united states certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 01-10873. argued march 24, 2003-decided june 9, 2003* petitioners were tried, convicted, and sentenced on federal narcotics charges in the district court of guam, a territorial court with subjectmatter jurisdiction over both federal-law and local-law causes. the ninth circuit panel convened to hear their appeals included two judges from that court, both of whom are life-tenured article iii judges, and the chief judge of the district court for the northern mariana islands, an article iv territorial-court judge appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate for a 10-year term. neither petitioner objected to the panel's composition before the cases were submitted for decision, and neither sought rehearing to challenge the panel's authority to decide their appeals after it affirmed their convictions. however, each filed a certiorari petition claiming that the judgment is invalid because a non-article iii judge participated on the panel. held: the ninth circuit panel did not have the authority to decide petitioners' appeals. pp.74-83. (a) in light of the relevant statutory provisions and historical usage, it is evident that congress did not contemplate the judges of the district court for the northern mariana islands to be "district judges" within the meaning of 28 u. s. c. 292(a), which authorizes the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 09 2003 (FN)

Prato Vs. Vallas

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-09-2003

prato v. vallas - 539 u.s. 1301 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus prato v. vallas et al. on application for extension of time no. 02ai042 (02-9753). decided june 9, 2003 petitioner's request for an extension of time to file a certiorari petition following this court's may 19, 2003, order denying her leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied because there are no grounds upon which this court would grant certiorari. justice stevens, circuit justice. petitioner filed a petition for a writ of certiorari and a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this court on december 20, 2002. on may 19, 2003, over my unpublished dissent, the court issued an order denying petitioner leave to proceed in forma pauperis and giving petitioner until june 9, 2003, to pay the docketing fee required by rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with rule 33.1 of the rules of this court. petitioner now seeks an extension of time within which to comply with the may 19 order, explaining that she needs additional time to raise money to pay the docketing fee and printing costs. having reviewed petitioner's petition for a writ of certiorari, i am satisfied that there are no grounds upon which this court would grant certiorari, and i therefore deny petitioner's request for an extension of time.

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2003 (FN)

American Ins. Assn. Vs. Garamendi

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-23-2003

..... eizenstat); see s. eizenstat, imperfect justice 208-212 (2003). from the beginning, the government's position, represented principally by under secretary of state (later deputy treasury secretary) stuart eizenstat, stressed mediated settlement "as an alternative to endless litigation" promising little relief to aging holocaust survivors. ser 953 (press conference by secretary of state albright). ensuing negotiations at the national level produced .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2003 (FN)

Gratz Vs. Bollinger

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-23-2003

gratz v. bollinger - 539 u.s. 244 (2003) october term, 2002 syllabus gratz et al. v. bollinger et al. certiorari before judgment to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit no. 02-516. argued april 1, 2003-decided june 23, 2003 petitioners gratz and hamacher, both of whom are michigan residents and caucasian, applied for admission to the university of michigan's (university) college of literature, science, and the arts (lsa) in 1995 and 1997, respectively. although the lsa considered gratz to be well qualified and hamacher to be within the qualified range, both were denied early admission and were ultimately denied admission. in order to promote consistency in the review of the many applications received, the university's office of undergraduate admissions (oua) uses written guidelines for each academic year. the guidelines have changed a number of times during the period relevant to this litigation. the oua considers a number of factors in making admissions decisions, including high school grades, standardized test scores, high school quality, curriculum strength, geography, alumni relationships, leadership, and race. during all relevant periods, the university has considered mricanamericans, hispanics, and native americans to be "underrepresented minorities," and it is undisputed that the university admits virtually every qualified applicant from these groups. the current guidelines use a selection method under which every applicant from an underrepresented .....

Tag this Judgment!


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