Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States interpreted the meaning of the phrase "substantially impairs" as used in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Case name Citation Date decided Postal Serv. v. Gregory: 534 U.S. 1: November 13, 2001 TRW Inc. v. Andrews: 534 U.S. 19: 2001: Nebraska v. Wyoming: 534 U.S. 40
Supreme Court of the United States 38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444 Established March 4, 1789 ; 235 years ago (1789-03-04) Location Washington, D.C. Coordinates 38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444 Composition method Presidential nomination with Senate confirmation Authorised by ...
Justice Appointment history Agreement with judgment Opinions filed Seniority Name President Date confirmed % # Total Chief Justice: William Rehnquist
Prior to passage of the Judiciary Act of 1925 the Supreme Court reviewed almost all cases sent to it. After 1925, most cases have been subject to being granted a writ of certiorari which the Court can grant or deny without ruling on the merits.
In 1874, the U.S. government created the United States Reports, and retroactively numbered older privately published case reports as part of the new series. As a result, cases appearing in volumes 1–90 of U.S. Reports have dual citation forms; one for the volume number of U.S. Reports, and one for the volume number of the reports named for the relevant reporter of decisions (these are called ...
Chickasaw Nation v. United States, 534 U.S. 84 (2001), [1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that Indian tribes were liable for taxes on gambling operations under 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701–2721. [2]
United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reaffirmed the proposition that the Fourth Amendment required courts to analyze the reasonableness of a traffic stop based on the totality of the circumstances instead of examining the plausibility of each reason an officer gives for stopping a motorist individually.