January 2001 Monday, January 8
DANIELS v. UNITED STATES
No. 99-9136
Subject:
Armed Career Criminal Act, Sentencing, Sentence Enhancement, Prior State Conviction
Question:
Resources:
BUFORD v. UNITED STATES
No. 99-9073
Subject:
Sentencing, Career Offender, Related Prior Sentences
Question:
Resources:
Subject:
Citizenship, Illegitimate Children, Fifth Amendment, Gender Discrimination
Question:
SHAFER v. SOUTH CAROLINA
No. 00-5250
Subject:
Death Penalty, Jury Instruction, Parole Ineligible
Question:
[Question Presented]
Decisions:
Resources:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. TRI COUNTY INDUS.
No. 99-1953
Subject:
Damages
Question:
[Question Presented]
Decisions:
DEPT. OF INTERIOR v. KLAMATH WATER USERS PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION
No. 99-1871
Subject:
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Inter-Agency/Intra-Agency Exemption, Indian Tribes
Question:
Whether confidential communications between Indian Tribes and the Department of the
Interior, in connection with the federal government's performance of its trust
responsibility to protect and manage tribal water rights, are "intra-agency" documents
that may be protected from disclosure under Exemption 5 of the Freedom of Information
Act, 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(5).
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
ALEXANDER v. SANDOVAL
No. 99-1908
Subject:
Civil Rights Act, Equal Protection Clause, English-Only Policy, Driver's License Examination, National Origin Discrimination
Question:
In enacting Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 under its Spending Clause powers, did Congress authorize individuals to bring private rights of action against States under disparate-impact regulations promulgated by federal agencies?
Decisions:
Subject:
First Amendment, Prison, Legal Assistance
Question:
Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that respondent's conduct was protected by a First Amendment right of
prison inmates to provide legal assistance to other inmates.
Decisions:
Subject:
Sixth Amendment, Right to Counsel, Waiver
Question:
Whether the Sixth Amendment rule announced in Michigan v. Jackson, 475 U.S. 625 (1986), which bars an officer from approaching a defendant to interrogate
him on a charged offense when he has invoked the right to counsel, also applies to interrogation on a factually related but uncharged offense.
Decisions:
Resources:
PGA TOUR, INC. v. MARTIN
No. 00-24
Subject:
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Public Accomodations, Golf Courses
Question:
Decisions:
Subject:
FDIC, D'Oench, Duhme Doctrine, Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enhancement Act of 1989 (FIRREA)
Question:
The federal common-law D'Oench, Duhme doctrine, created and expanded by D'Oench, Duhme & Co., Inc. v. FDIC, 315 U.S. 447 (1942), and its progeny, generally provides federal banking insurers, receivers, and their successors-in-interest added protections against unrecorded agreements that might form the basis of a claim or defense relating to federally insured banks that have come under the control of federal agents. There is a broad and well-recognized circuit split over whether this federal common-law doctrine is viable in light of this Court's decisions in O'Melveny & Myers v. FDIC, 512 U.S. 79 (1994), and Atherton v. FDIC, 519 U.S. 213 (1997).
The question presented in this case is:
Whether the federal common-law D'Oench, Duhme doctrine constitutes a valid bar to petitioner's claims?
Decisions: