Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Case name Citation Summary United States v. Carmack: 329 U.S. 230 (1946) : land held by a local government is still subject to eminent domain by the federal government : Louisiana ex rel. Francis v.
The Vinson Court refers to the Supreme Court of the United States from 1946 to 1953, when Fred M. Vinson served as Chief Justice of the United States.Vinson succeeded Harlan F. Stone as Chief Justice after the latter's death, and Vinson served as Chief Justice until his death, at which point Earl Warren was nominated and confirmed to succeed Vinson.
(2) Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(E) deprives this Court of certiorari jurisdiction over the grant or denial of an authorization by a court of appeals to file a second or successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. January 17, 2025: Department of Education v. Career Colleges and Schools of Texas: 24-413
The trial court inquired whether the broadcast presented a clear and present danger to the administration of justice and concluded that, while it didn't have an effect on the judges in this case, it had an effect on all potential jurors and therefore deprived the defendant of the right to a jury trial. Removal wouldn't have worked, because the ...
The Philadelphia-based firm did not respond to a call from NBC News but court records show that Magna served as Trump’s jury consultant when was ordered to pay $83.3 million in damages to writer ...
It includes United States Supreme Court cases that can also be found in the parent category, or in diffusing subcategories of the parent. Cases of the Supreme Court of the United States decided during the tenure of Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson (1946–53).
The boys’ father, Charles Vinson, 37, was also sentenced Thursday, to 49 years. Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Clarke rejected defense requests to impose the minimum sentences, citing among other ...
In an opinion by Justice Stanley Forman Reed, which three other justices (Chief Justice Vinson and Associate Justices Hugo Black and Robert H. Jackson) joined, and with which Justice Felix Frankfurter concurred, the Court held that re-executing Francis did not constitute double jeopardy or cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Reed wrote,