Did the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan case or Dusky v. United States come first?
51d0787a1ab594127a1ae4adde053a5d
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that established the actual malice standard, which has to be met before press reports about public officials can be considered to be defamation and libel; and hence allowed free reporting of the civil rights campaigns in the southern United States. It is one of the key decisions supporting the freedom of the press. The actual malice standard requires that the plaintiff in a defamation or libel case, if he is a public figure, prove that the publisher of the statement in question knew that the statement was false or acted in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity. Because of the extremely high burden of proof on the plaintiff, and the difficulty of proving the defendant's knowledge and intentions, such claims by public figures rarely prevail.
0e705c073df5ee0dc884554f63f64efd
Dusky v. United States Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960) , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court affirmed a defendant's right to have a competency evaluation before proceeding to trial. The Court outlined the basic standards for determining competency.
cbefa0b57e8f91098bba21f1b78d04c9
Jerry Bartholomew Sullivan Jerry Bartholomew Sullivan (January 1, 1859 – April 17, 1948) was a Judge for the United States Customs Court.
516c40b72ffb2f907b662d919fdfeb5c
United States v. Juvenile Male United States v. Juvenile Male may refer to two "per curiam" opinions by the Supreme Court of the United States handed down at different times in the same case:
ffac07a1f920c67b8d344b833ec2379c
Thomas James McAvoy Thomas James McAvoy (born September 17, 1938) is a Senior United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York.
0669c82389d4c211efc37cc45d2d522a
William Bondy William Bondy (April 9, 1870 – March 30, 1964) was a longtime federal judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
7b05129303feb4db81fbfc96dc619c9c
People v. Croswell The People of the State of New York v. Harry Croswell (3 Johns. Cas. 337 N.Y. 1804), commonly known and cited as People v. Croswell, is an important case in the evolution of United States defamation law. It was a criminal libel case brought against a Federalist journalist named Harry Croswell for his statements about a number of public officials, including then-President Thomas Jefferson.
db800dbff69400a423a43386dd7a59b6
Mazer v. Stein Mazer v. Stein, 347 U.S. 201 (1954), was a copyright case decided by the United States Supreme Court. In an opinion written by Justice Stanley F. Reed, the Supreme Court held that the statuettes—male and female dancing figures made of semivitreous china—used as bases for fully equipped electric lamps were copyrightable, even though the lamp itself was a utilitarian mass-produced item.
c88e4363a341e48679bb3cf692d48392
R. v. Smith There are a number of court cases by the name of "R. v. Smith":
e7bf83bf428f13348b62044057950edc
Devlin v. Smith Devlin v. Smith, 89 N.Y. 470 (1882) was a seminal case decided by the New York Court of Appeals in the area of product liability law.
631b13e544028c588bb63d547262ee44
United States v. American Library Ass'n United States v. American Library Association, 539 U.S. 194 (2003), was a decision in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that the United States Congress has the authority to require public schools and libraries receiving E-Rate discounts to install web filtering software as a condition of receiving federal funding. In a plurality opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that: 1.) public libraries' use of Internet filtering software does not violate their patrons' First Amendment free speech rights; 2.) The Children's Internet Protection Act is not unconstitutional.
c98fa78e0b08ee84d9b29a6b09c979fd
Sullivan v. Zebley Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521 (1990), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the determination of childhood Social Security Disability benefits. In the decision, the Supreme Court ruled that substantial parts of the Supplemental Security Income program's regulation on determining disability for children were inconsistent with the Social Security Act; particularly, the statutory standard of “comparable severity.” The suit highlighted what some felt was the need for a step in the evaluation of childhood disability claims that would be akin to the "functional" evaluation considered in many adult claims. It resulted in the addition of a consideration of functioning, and not merely medical severity, in children's SSI claims. The decision was rendered on February 20, 1990.
c02509019ce95214e74b1fe2482c3ed1
Maples v. Thomas Maples v. Thomas, 565 U.S. 266 (2012) , is a United States Supreme Court ruling in which the Court ruled 7–2 that Cory R. Maples, who had been convicted of murdering two people and faced a possible death sentence, should get another opportunity in court because his lawyers at Sullivan & Cromwell had abandoned him.
0250e11b822db467e8c3e1eef0ca9809
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. ( ; March 8, 1841 – March 6, 1935) was an American jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1902 to 1932, and as Acting Chief Justice of the United States from January–February 1930. Noted for his long service, his concise and pithy opinions and his deference to the decisions of elected legislatures, he is one of the most widely cited United States Supreme Court justices in history, particularly for his "clear and present danger" opinion for a unanimous Court in the 1919 case of "Schenck v. United States", and is one of the most influential American common law judges, honored during his lifetime in Great Britain as well as the United States. Holmes retired from the Court at the age of 90 years, making him the oldest Justice in the Supreme Court's history. He also served as an Associate Justice and as Chief Justice on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, and was Weld Professor of Law at the Harvard Law School, of which he was an alumnus.
2d9b163442478a95c0b458687c6cc489
United States v. Maine United States v. Maine, 469 U.S. 504 (1985), also known as the "Rhode Island and New York Boundary Case", was a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which held that the Long Island and Block Island Sounds in part constitute a juridical bay under Article 7(6), Long Island being an extension of the mainland and the southern headland of the bay, and (b) that the bay closed at the line drawn from Montauk Point at the eastern tip of Long Island to Watch Hill Point on the Rhode Island shore, the waters of the bay west of the closing line being internal state waters, and the waters of Block Island Sound east of that line being territorial waters and high seas. Maine is named in the title of the case because it is the northernmost of the thirteen defendant states with coastline on the Atlantic Ocean in a series of cases related to overlapping claims of state and federal jurisdiction over seas and the seafloor.
a092e54c3b629d1c493e16333f9a2cd1
Stettinius v. United States Stettinius v. United States, 13,387 (D.C. Cir. 1839), was a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that was handed down November, 1839. It reversed the conviction of a defendant for unlawfully passing paper currency, because the indictment did not properly aver, and the verdict did not properly find, that the notes he had allegedly passed were indeed paper currency.
49ef4a1630e732351497e7189967b5d3
Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton Harte-Hanks Communications Inc. v. Connaughton, 491 U.S. 657(1989), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States supplied an additional journalistic behavior that constitutes actual malice as first discussed in "New York Times Co. v. Sullivan" (1964). In the case, the Court held that departure from responsible reporting and unreasonable reporting conduct alone were not sufficient to award a public figure damages in a libel case. However, the Court also ruled that if reporters wrote with reckless disregard for the truth, which included ignoring obvious sources for their report, plaintiffs could be awarded compensatory damages on the grounds of actual malice.
7ef4c8a0e32dee774c7098cfea7fae0a
Richard J. Sullivan Richard Joseph Sullivan (born April 10, 1964) is a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
56d87d0521632cfec33404b016ec8fa7
Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. United States Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. United States, 345 U.S. 594 (1953), is an antitrust law decision by the United States Supreme Court. In a 5–4 decision it held that a tie-in sale of morning and evening newspaper advertising space does not violate the Sherman Antitrust Act, because there was no market dominance in the tying product.
a286af87580a6580e224228a19f8e6bf
Nashville, Chattanooga &amp; St. Louis Railway Co. v. United States Nashville, Chattanooga &amp; St. Louis Railway Co. v. United States
61cb59557958c6bf995a5f0526224435
Overbreadth doctrine In American jurisprudence, the overbreadth doctrine is primarily concerned with facial challenges to laws under the First Amendment. American courts have recognized several exceptions to the speech protected by the First Amendment (for example, obscenity, fighting words, and libel or defamation), and states therefore have some latitude to regulate unprotected speech. A statute doing so is overly broad (hence, overbreadth) if, in proscribing "unprotected" speech, it also proscribes "protected" speech. Because an overly broad law may deter constitutionally protected speech, the overbreadth doctrine allows a party to whom the law may constitutionally be applied to challenge the statute on the ground that it violates the First Amendment rights of others. See, e.g., "Board of Trustees of State Univ. of N.Y. v. Fox", 492 U.S. 469, 483 (1989), and "R. A. V. v. City of St. Paul", 505 U.S. 377 (1992). Overbreadth is closely related to vagueness; if a prohibition is expressed in a way that is too unclear for a person to reasonably know whether or not their conduct falls within the law, then to avoid the risk of legal consequences they often stay far away from anything that could possibly fit the uncertain wording of the law. The law's effects are thereby far broader than intended or than the U.S. Constitution permits, and hence the law is overbroad.
d32aa5f496d01d72ff6eadfff2d42b1a
Mancusi v. DeForte Mancusi v. DeForte, 392 U.S. 364 , is a 1968 decision of the United States Supreme Court on privacy and the Fourth Amendment. It originated in the lower courts as United States ex rel. Frank DeForte, appellant v. Vincent R. Mancusi, Warden of Attica Prison, Attica, New York, appellee, a petition for a writ of "habeas corpus" by a prisoner who had exhausted all his state appeals. By a 6–3 margin the Court affirmed the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit's reversal of a district court denial of the petition.