Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: recent Court: us supreme court Year: 2005 Page 3 of about 61 results (0.068 seconds)

Jun 13 2005 (FN)

Merck Kgaa Vs. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-13-2005

merck kgaa v. integra lifesciences i, ltd. - 03-1237 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 merck kgaa v. integra lifesciences i, ltd. supreme court of the united states merck kgaa v . integra lifesciences i, ltd., et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the federal circuit no. 03 1237.argued april 20, 2005 decided june 13, 2005 it is not an act of [patent] infringement to use or import into the united states a patented invention solely for uses reasonably related to the development and submission of information under a federal law which regulates the use of drugs. 35 u. s. c. 271(e)(1). the federal food, drug, and cosmetic act of 1938 (fdca) is such a law. under the fdca, a drug maker must submit research data to the food and drug administration (fda) in an investigational new drug application (ind) when seeking authorization to conduct human clinical trials, and in a new drug application (nda) when seeking authorization to market a new drug. respondents filed a patent-infringement suit, claiming, inter alia, that petitioner had willfully infringed their patents by supplying respondents rgd peptides to other defendants for use in preclinical research. petitioner answered, among other things, that 271(e)(1) exempted its actions from infringement. the jury found otherwise and awarded damages. in post-trial motions, the district court affirmed the jury s award and denied petitioner s motion for judgment as a matter of law. the federal circuit affirmed that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 13 2005 (FN)

Johnson Vs. California

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-13-2005

johnson v. california - 04-6964 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 johnson v. california supreme court of the united states johnson v . california certiorari to the court of appeal of california, first appellate district no. 04 6964.argued april 18, 2005 decided june 13, 2005 petitioner johnson, a black man, was convicted in a california state court of assaulting and murdering a white child. during jury selection, a number of prospective jurors were removed for cause until 43 eligible jurors remained, three of whom were black. the prosecutor used 3 of his 12 peremptory challenges to remove the prospective black jurors, resulting in an all-white jury. defense counsel objected to those strikes on the ground that they were unconstitutionally based on race. the trial judge did not ask the prosecutor to explain his strikes, but instead simply found that petitioner had failed to establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination under the governing state precedent, people v. wheeler , which required a showing of a strong likelihood that the exercise of peremptory challenges was based on group bias. the judge explained that, although the case was close, his review of the record convinced him that the prosecutor s strikes could be justified by race-neutral reasons. the california court of appeal set aside the conviction, but the state supreme court reinstated it, stressing that batson v. kentucky , 476 u. s. 79 , permits state courts to establish the standards used to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 2005 (FN)

Spector Vs. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-06-2005

spector v. norwegian cruise line ltd. - 03-1388 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 spector v. norwegian cruise line ltd. supreme court of the united states spector et al. v . norwegian cruise line ltd. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit no. 03 1388.argued february 28, 2005 decided june 6, 2005 respondent ncl is a cruise line operating foreign-flag ships departing from, and returning to, united states ports. the petitioners, disabled individuals and their companions who purchased tickets for round-trip ncl cruises from houston, sued ncl under title iii of the americans with disabilities act of 1990 (ada), 42 u. s. c. 12181 et seq ., which prohibits discrimination based on disability in places of public accommodation, 12182(a), and in specified public transportation services, 12184(a), and requires covered entities to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures to accommodate disabled persons, 12182(b)(2)(a)(ii), 12184(b)(2)(a), and to remove architectural barriers, and communication barriers that are structural in nature where such removal is readily achievable, 12182(b)(2)(a)(iv), 12184(b)(2)(c). though holding title iii generally applicable, the district court found that the petitioners claims regarding physical barriers to access could not go forward because the federal agencies charged with promulgating ada architectural and structural guidelines had not done so for cruise ships. the court therefore dismissed the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 2005 (FN)

Gonzales Vs. Raich

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-06-2005

gonzales v. raich - 03-1454 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 gonzales v. raich supreme court of the united states gonzales, attorney general, et al. v. raich et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 03 1454.argued november 29, 2004 decided june 6, 2005 california s compassionate use act authorizes limited marijuana use for medicinal purposes. respondents raich and monson are california residents who both use doctor-recommended marijuana for serious medical conditions. after federal drug enforcement administration (dea) agents seized and destroyed all six of monson s cannabis plants, respondents brought this action seeking injunctive and declaratory relief prohibiting the enforcement of the federal controlled substances act (csa) to the extent it prevents them from possessing, obtaining, or manufacturing cannabis for their personal medical use. respondents claim that enforcing the csa against them would violate the commerce clause and other constitutional provisions. the district court denied respondents motion for a preliminary injunction, but the ninth circuit reversed, finding that they had demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the claim that the csa is an unconstitutional exercise of congress commerce clause authority as applied to the intrastate, noncommercial cultivation and possession of cannabis for personal medical purposes as recommended by a patient s physician pursuant to valid california state law. the court .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2005 (FN)

Cutter Vs. Wilkinson

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-31-2005

cutter v. wilkinson - 03-9877 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 cutter v. wilkinson supreme court of the united states cutter et al. v . wilkinson, director, ohio department of rehabilitation and correction, et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit no. 03 9877.argued march 21, 2005 decided may 31, 2005 section 3 of the religious land use and institutionalized persons act of 2000 (rluipa), 42 u. s. c. 2000cc 1(a)(1) (2), provides in part: no government shall impose a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person residing in or confined to an institution, unless the burden furthers a compelling governmental interest, and does so by the least restrictive means. petitioners, current and former inmates of ohio state institutions, allege, inter alia , that respondent prison officials violated 3 by failing to accommodate petitioners exercise of their nonmainstream religions in a variety of ways. respondents moved to dismiss that claim, arguing, among other things, that 3, on its face, improperly advances religion in violation of the first amendment s establishment clause. rejecting that argument, the district court stated that rluipa permits safety and security undisputedly compelling state interests to outweigh an inmate s claim to a religious accommodation. on the thin record before it, the court could not find that enforcement of rluipa, inevitably, would compromise prison security. reversing on interlocutory appeal, the sixth .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2005 (FN)

Arthur Andersen Llp Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-31-2005

arthur andersen llp v. united states - 04-368 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 arthur andersen llp v. united states supreme court of the united states arthur andersen llp v . united states certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit no. 04 368.argued april 27, 2005 decided may 31, 2005 as enron corporation s financial difficulties became public, petitioner, enron s auditor, instructed its employees to destroy documents pursuant to its document retention policy. petitioner was indicted under 18 u. s. c. 1512(b)(2)(a) and (b), which make it a crime to knowingly corruptly persuad[e] another person with intent to cause that person to withhold documents from, or alter documents for use in, an official proceeding. the jury returned a guilty verdict, and the fifth circuit affirmed, holding that the district court s jury instructions properly conveyed the meaning of corruptly persuades and official proceeding in 1512(b); that the jury need not find any consciousness of wrongdoing in order to convict; and that there was no reversible error. held: the jury instructions failed to convey properly the elements of a corrup[t] persuas[ion] conviction under 1512(b). pp. 6 12. (a) this court s traditional restraint in assessing federal criminal statutes reach, see, e.g., united states v. aguilar, 515 u. s. 593 , 600, is particularly appropriate here, where the act underlying the conviction persua[sion] is by itself innocuous. even persuad[ing] a person with .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 2005 (FN)

Tory Vs. Cochran

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-31-2005

tory v. cochran - 03-1488 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 tory v. cochran supreme court of the united states tory et al. v . cochran certiorari to the court of appeal of california, second appellate district no. 03 1488.argued march 22, 2005 decided may 31, 2005 in a state-law defamation action filed by attorney johnnie l. cochran, jr., a california trial court found that petitioner tory, assisted by petitioner craft and others, had, inter alia, falsely claimed that cochran owed him money, picketed cochran s office with signs containing insults and obscenities, and pursued cochran while chanting similar threats and insults, in order to coerce cochran into paying tory money to desist from such libelous and slanderous activity. because tory indicated that he would continue to engage in the activity absent a court order, the court permanently enjoined petitioners and their agents from, among other things, picketing, displaying signs, and making oral statements about cochran and his firm in any public forum. the california court of appeal affirmed, and this court granted certiorari. after oral argument, cochran s counsel informed the court of cochran s death, moved to substitute cochran s widow as respondent, and suggested that the case be dismissed as moot. petitioners agreed to the substitution, but denied that the case was moot. held: cochran s widow is substituted as respondent, but the case is not moot. despite cochran s death, the injunction remains in effect. nothing .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 23 2005 (FN)

Lingle Vs. Chevron U. S. A. Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-23-2005

lingle v. chevron u. s. a. inc. - 04-163 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 lingle v. chevron u. s. a. inc. supreme court of the united states lingle, governor of hawaii, et al. v . chevron u. s. a. inc. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 04 163.argued february 22, 2005 decided may 23, 2005 concerned about the effects of market concentration on retail gasoline prices, the hawaii legislature passed act 257, which limits the rent oil companies may charge dealers leasing company-owned service stations. respondent chevron u. s. a. inc., then one of the largest oil companies in hawaii, brought this suit seeking a declaration that the rent cap effected an unconstitutional taking of its property and an injunction against application of the cap to its stations. applying agins v. city of tiburon , 447 u. s. 255 , 260 where this court declared that government regulation of private property effects a taking if [it] does not substantially advance legitimate state interests the district court held that the rent cap effects an uncompensated taking in violation of the fifth and fourteenth amendments because it does not substantially advance hawaii s asserted interest in controlling retail gas prices. the ninth circuit affirmed. held: agins substantially advance[s] formula is not an appropriate test for determining whether a regulation effects a fifth amendment taking. pp. 6 19. (a) the paradigmatic taking requiring just compensation is a direct .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 23 2005 (FN)

Clingman Vs. Beaver

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-23-2005

clingman v. beaver - 04-37 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 clingman v. beaver supreme court of the united states clingman, secretary, oklahoma state election board, et al. v . beaver et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit no. 04 37.argued january 19, 2005 decided may 23, 2005 under oklahoma s semiclosed primary law, a political party may invite only its own registered members and voters registered as independents to vote in its primary. when the libertarian party of oklahoma (lpo) notified the state election board it wanted to open its upcoming primary to all registered voters regardless of party affiliation, the board agreed as to independents, but not as to other parties members. the lpo and several oklahomans registered as republicans and democrats then sued for equitable relief, alleging that oklahoma s statute unconstitutionally burdens their first amendment right to freedom of political association. the district court upheld the statute on the grounds that it did not severely burden respondents associational rights and that any burden imposed was justified by oklahoma s asserted interests in preserving parties as viable and identifiable interest groups and in ensuring that primary results accurately reflect party members voting. reversing, the tenth circuit concluded that the statute imposed a severe burden on respondents associational rights and was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. held: the judgment .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 23 2005 (FN)

Deck Vs. Missouri

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-23-2005

deck v. missouri - 04-5293 (2005) syllabus october term, 2004 deck v. missouri supreme court of the united states deck v. missouri certiorari to the supreme court of missouri no. 04 5293.argued march 1, 2005 decided may 23, 2005 petitioner deck was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death, but the missouri supreme court set aside the sentence. at his new sentencing proceeding, he was shackled with leg irons, handcuffs, and a belly chain. the trial court overruled counsel s objections to the shackles, and deck was again sentenced to death. affirming, the state supreme court rejected deck s claim that his shackling violated, inter alia, the federal constitution. held: the constitution forbids the use of visible shackles during a capital trial s penalty phase, as it does during the guilt phase, unless that use is justified by an essential state interest such as courtroom security specific to the defendant on trial. holbrook v. flynn, 475 u. s. 560 , 568 569. pp. 3 10. (a) the law has long forbidden routine use of visible shackles during a capital trial s guilt phase, permitting shackling only in the presence of a special need. in light of holbrook , illinois v. allen, 397 u. s. 337 , early english cases, and lower court shackling doctrine dating back to the 19th century, it is now clear that this is a basic element of due process protected by the federal constitution. thus, the fifth and fourteenth amendments prohibit using physical restraints visible to the jury .....

Tag this Judgment!


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