Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Browder v. Gayle, 142 F. Supp. 707 (1956), [1] was a landmark federal court case that ruled that segregation on public transportation was unconstitutional. The case was heard before a three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama on the segregation of Montgomery and Alabama state buses.
The case was argued on April 14, 1886 - April 15, 1886 and was decided on October 25, 1886, by vote of 6 to 3. Associate Justice Miller wrote for the Court with Associate Justices Field, Harlan, Woods, Matthews, and Blatchford concurring; Associate Justices Bradley and Gray, along with Chief Justice Waite, dissented.
Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996), was a unanimous United States Supreme Court decision [1] that "declared that any traffic offense committed by a driver was a legitimate legal basis for a stop."
In the United States, landmark court decisions come most frequently from the Supreme Court. United States courts of appeals may also make such decisions, particularly if the Supreme Court chooses not to review the case. Although many cases from state supreme courts are significant in developing the law of that state, only a few are so ...
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a statute requiring suspects to disclose their names during a valid Terry stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment if the statute first requires reasonable suspicion of criminal involvement, and does not violate the Fifth Amendment if there is no ...
But the Court noted that "incidental restrictions on freedom of movement would not tend to affect an individual's sense of security and privacy in traveling in an automobile." Indeed, the California court's holding was a kind of incentive for the police to conduct "roving patrols" that would violate the Fourth Amendment rights of drivers.
Early federal and state civil procedure in the United States was rather ad hoc and was based on traditional common law procedure but with much local variety. There were varying rules that governed different types of civil cases such as "actions" at law or "suits" in equity or in admiralty; these differences grew from the history of "law" and "equity" as separate court systems in English law.
Court historians and other legal scholars consider each chief justice who presides over the Supreme Court of the United States to be the head of an era of the Court. [1] These lists are sorted chronologically by chief justice and include most major cases decided by the court.