Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Justice who had written the Gobitis ruling in 1940 – Felix Frankfurter – strongly disagreed with how that precedent was being overturned in the Barnette ruling. Frankfurter reinforced his holding in Gobitis that those who disagree with a law should attempt to change it through the political process, rather than break that law due to ...
After a brief stint at the Federal Communications Commission (1940–1941), he served as a law clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter from 1941 to 1943. Among the opinions Elman was involved in drafting during his clerkship was Frankfurter's dissent in the second Flag Salute case, West Virginia State Board of Education v.
This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court.If you would like to participate, you can attached to this page, or visit the project page.
Felix Frankfurter (November 15, 1882 – February 22, 1965) was an Austrian-born American jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1939 until 1962, during which he was an advocate of judicial restraint. Frankfurter was born in Vienna, immigrating to New York City at the age of 12.
Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586 (1940), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States restricting the religious rights of public school students under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The case involved Robert Barnett, a US Airways employee who injured his back, rendering him physically unable to perform his cargo-handling job. [3] Using his seniority, Barnett transferred to a less-demanding mailroom job. However, this position later became open to seniority-based bidding and was bid on by more senior employees.
Guaranty Trust Co. v. York, 326 U.S. 99 (1945), was a United States Supreme Court case that described how federal courts were to follow state law. Justice Frankfurter delivered the majority opinion further refining the doctrine set forth in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins .
The judge held that the hospital was not liable. Even if they were to have admitted Mr. Barnett, there would have been little or no chance that the antidote would have been administered to him in time to prevent his death. [2] Although the hospital had breached the standard of care, that breach was held to not be a cause of Mr. Barnett's death. [1]