|
|
Supreme Court Docket
Unscheduled
October 2004 Term
Many documents listed on this page are PDF files  that may be viewed using AdobeReader.
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., et al. v. Grokster, Ltd., et al.
No. 04-480
Subject:
Copyright Law, Internet-Based "File Sharing"
Question:
Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in concluding, contrary
to long-established principles of secondary liability in
copyright law (and in acknowledged conflict with the
Seventh Circuit), that the Internet-based "file sharing"
services Grokster and StreamCast should be immunized from
copyright liability for the millions of daily acts of copyright
infringement that occur on their services and that constitute
at least 90% of the total use of the services.
Decisions:
Resources:
Briefs:
|
|
Jose Ernesto Medellin v. Doug Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
No. 04-5928
Subject:
Mexican Nationals, International Court of Justice, Vienna Convention, Death Penalty
Questions:
The United States and Mexico are party to the Vienna
Convention on Consular Relations and its Optional Protocol
Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes. Acting
on the consent set forth in the Optional Protocol, Mexico
initiated proceedings in the International Court of Justice
seeking relief for the violation of Petitioner’s Vienna
Convention rights. On March 31, 2004, the Court rendered a
judgment that adjudicated Petitioner’s rights. Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mex. v. U.S.) , 2004 I.C.J. 128
(Mar. 31). The Avena Judgment built on the Court’s rulings
in LaGrand (F.R.G. v. U.S.), 2001 I.C.J. 104 (June 27), an
earlier case also brought under the Optional Protocol.
On Petitioner's application for a certificate of
appealability of the denial of his petition for habeas corpus,
the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held
that precedents of this Court and its own barred it from
complying with the LaGrand and Avena Judgments.
- In a case brought by a Mexican national whose rights
were adjudicated in the Avena Judgment, must a court in
the United States apply as the rule of decision,
notwithstanding any inconsistent United States precedent,
the Avena holding that the United States courts must
review and reconsider the national's conviction and
sentence, without resort to procedural default doctrines?
- In a case brought by a foreign national of a State party to
the Vienna Convention, should a court in the United
States give effect to the LaGrand and Avena Judgments
as a matter of international judicial comity and in the
interest of uniform treaty interpretation?
Decisions:
Resources:
|
Briefs:
|
|
Ulysses Tory, et al. v. Johnnie L. Cochran
No. 03-1488
Subject:
First Amendment, Free Speech, Permanent Injunction against Speech, Defamation
Question:
Whether a permanent injunction as a remedy in a defamation action, preventing all
future speech about an admitted public figure, violates the First Amendment.
Decisions:
- Court of Appeal of California, Unpublished Opinion Filed: October 29, 2003
- United States Supreme Court, Cert. Granted: September 28, 2004
Resources:
|
Briefs:
|
|
Counsel of Record
For Petitioners Tory, et al.:
Erwin Chemerinsky
Duke University School of Law
Durham, NC
For Respondent Cochran:
Jonathan B. Cole
Sherman Oaks, CA
|
|
Jon B. Cutter, et al. v. Reginald Wilkinson, Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, et al.
No. 03-9877
Subject:
Question:
Whether Congress violated the Establishment Clause by enacting the RReligious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1 through § 2000cc-5,
which requires state officials to lift unnecessary governmental burdens imposed on
the religious exercise of institutionalized persons under their control.
Decisions:
Resources:
|
Briefs:
|
|
Counsel of Record
For Petitioners Cutter, et al.:
David Goldberger
Ohio State University College of Law
Columbus,OH
For Respondents Wilkinson, et al.:
Douglas R. Cole
State Solicitor General
Columbus, OH
For Respondent United States:
Paul D. Clement
Acting U.S. Solicitor General
Washington, DC
|
|
To view PDF files listed on this page you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader
© 2008 FindLaw
© 2002,
2003 The Washington Post Company
|
|
|
