united states supreme court cases
Robinson v. Florida
1964 in law | united states supreme court cases Robinson v. Florida, 378 U.S. 153 (1964)Full text of the decision courtesy of Findlaw.com, was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the convictions of several white and African American persons who were refused service at a restaurant based upon a prior Court decision, holding that a Florida regulation requiring a restaurant that employed or served persons of both races to have separate lavatory rooms resulted in the state becoming entangled in racial discriminatory activity in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Background
Cruz v. Beto
united states first amendment case law | united states supreme court casesCruz v. Veto, 405 U.S. 319 (1972) is a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the court upheld a Free Exercise claim on the basis of the allegations that the state of Texas had discriminated against a Buddhist prisoner by "denying him a reasonable opportunity to pursue his Buddhist faith comparable to that offered other prisoners adhering to conventional religious precepts."
External links
McArthur v. Scott
1885 in law | united states supreme court casesMcArthur v. Scott, , regarded a suit brought to contest a will which directed land to be conveyed to or divided among remaindermen at the expiration of a particular estate, are to be presumed, unless clearly controlled by other provisions, to relate to the beginning of enjoyment by remaindermen, and not to the vesting of the title in them. McArthur v. Scott, 113 U.S. 340 (1885) Justia.com
Dakota County v. Glidden
1885 in law | united states supreme court casesDakota County v. Glidden, , was a motion to dismiss a suit issued in aid of a railroad. Judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant brought a writ of error to reverse it. Subsequently to the judgment, the county settled with the plaintiff and other bondholders, by giving them new bonds bearing a less rate of interest, and the old bonds, which were the cause of action in this suit, were surrendered and destroyed. These facts were brought before this Court by affidavits and transcripts from the county records, accompanied by a motion to dismiss the writ of error. Dakota County v. Glidden, 113 U.S. 222 (1885) Justia.com
Price v. Pennsylvania R. Co.
1885 in law | united states supreme court casesPrice v. Pennsylvania R. Co., , was a case where the plaintiff sued the defendant for the loss of her husband by a death which the jury found, by a special verdict, to be caused by the negligence of the company's servant or servants. Price v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 113 U.S. 218 (1885) Justia.com
Sicurella v. United States
1955 in law | united states supreme court casesIntroduction
Prior history
Facts of the case
Decision of the Court
Majority decision
Minority opinions
Gonzales v. United States
1955 in law | united states supreme court casesIntroduction
Prior history
Facts of the case
Decision of the Court
Majority decision
Minority opinions
Dickinson v. United States
1953 in law | united states supreme court casesIntroduction
Prior history
Facts of the case
Decision of the Court
Majority decision
Minority opinions
Davison v. Von Lingen
1885 in law | united states supreme court casesDavison v. Von Lingen, 113 U.S. 40 (1885), , On the first of August, 1879, a charter-party was entered into between the owners of the steam-ship Whickham and the firm of A. Schumacher & Co., composed of George A. Von Lingen, Carl A. Von Lingen, and William G. Atkinson. Davison v. Von Lingen, 113 U.S. 40 (1885) Justia.com
Dusky v. United States
1986 in law | united states supreme court casesDusky v. United States , 1960 (per curiam) is a landmark case affirming a defendant's right to have a competency evaluation before preceding to trial. In this case, the court outlined the basic standards for determining competency.
Milton Dusky, a 33 year old man, was charged with assisting in the rape of an underage female and kidnapping. He was clearly suffering from schizophrenia but was found Competent to Stand Trial and received a sentence of 45 year. On petition of writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, the petitioner requested that his conviction be reversed on the grounds that he was not competent to stand trial at the time of the proceeding.
Decision
Upon reviewing the evidence, the court decided to grant the writ of certiorari. The court ruled that to be competent to stand trial defendant must have a "sufficient present ability to consult with lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational and factual understanding of proceedings against him." The court made clear that a brief mental status exam was insufficient. His case was remanded for retrial, at which time his sentence was reduced to 20 years.Footnotes
