519BV$spin 05-12-99 06:48:38 UNITED STATES REPORTS 519 OCT. TERM 1996 AMENDMENTS OF RULES 519BV$titl 05-12-99 06:54:32 UNITED STATES REPORTS VOLUME 519 CASES ADJUDGED IN THE SUPREME COURT AT OCTOBER TERM, 1996 Beginning of Term October 7, 1996, Through February 26, 1997 Together With Opinion of Individual Justice in Chambers FRANK D. WAGNER reporter of decisions WASHINGTON : 1999 Printed on Uncoated Permanent Printing Paper For sale by the U. S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328 519BV$ Unit: $UII [06-25-99 12:25:11] PGT: FRT Erratum 516 U. S. 1101, line 7: "63 Ohio St. 3d 1418" should be "63 Ohio St. 3d 1419". ii 519bv$$iii 05-13-99 09:08:02 PGT * frtbx n J USTICES of the SU PREM E COU RT during the time of these reports WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST, Chief Justice. JOHN PAUL STEVENS, Associate Justice. SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR, Associate Justice. ANTONIN SCALIA, Associate Justice. ANTHONY M. KENNEDY, Associate Justice. DAVID H. SOUTER, Associate Justice. CLARENCE THOMAS, Associate Justice. RUTH BADER GINSBURG, Associate Justice. STEPHEN BREYER, Associate Justice. retired LEWIS F. POWELL, Jr., Associate Justice. WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, Jr., Associate Justice. BYRON R. WHITE, Associate Justice. HARRY A. BLACKMUN, Associate Justice. officers of the court JANET RENO, Attorney General. WALTER DELLINGER, Acting Solicitor General.* WILLIAM K. SUTER, Clerk. FRANK D. WAGNER, Reporter of Decisions. DALE E. BOSLEY, Marshal. SHELLEY L. DOWLING, Librarian. *Acting Solicitor General Dellinger was presented to the Court on October 7, 1996. See post, p. v. iii 519BV$$$iv 05-12-99 06:51:43 PGT * frtbx n SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Allotment of Justices It is ordered that the following allotment be made of the Chief Justice and Associate Justices of this Court among the circuits, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 42, and that such allotment be entered of record, effective September 30, 1994, viz.: For the District of Columbia Circuit, William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice. For the First Circuit, David H. Souter, Associate Justice. For the Second Circuit, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice. For the Third Circuit, David H. Souter, Associate Justice. For the Fourth Circuit, William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice. For the Fifth Circuit, Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice. For the Sixth Circuit, John Paul Stevens, Associate Justice. For the Seventh Circuit, John Paul Stevens, Associate Justice. For the Eighth Circuit, Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice. For the Ninth Circuit, Sandra Day O'Connor, Associate Justice. For the Tenth Circuit, Stephen Breyer, Associate Justice. For the Eleventh Circuit, Anthony M. Kennedy, Associate Justice. For the Federal Circuit, William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice. September 30, 1994. (For next previous allotment, and modifications, see 502 U. S., p. vi, 509 U. S., p. v, and 512 U. S., p. v.) iv 519BV$$$$v 05-12-99 06:51:53 PGT * frtbx n PRESENTATION OF THE ACTING SOLICITOR GENERAL Supreme Court of the United States MONDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1996 Present: Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Stevens, Justice O'Connor, Justice Scalia, Justice Kennedy, Justice Souter, Justice Thomas, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer. The Chief Justice said: The Court now recognizes the Attorney General, Janet Reno. The Attorney General said: Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court. I have the honor to present to the Court the Acting Solicitor Gen- eral, Walter Dellinger of North Carolina. The Chief Justice said: Thank you, General Reno. Mr. Solicitor General, the Court welcomes you to the per- formance of the important office that you have assumed, to represent the government of the United States before this Court. We wish you well in your new office. v Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Note: All undesignated references herein to the United States Code are to the 1994 edition. Cases reported before page 801 are those decided with opinions of the Court or decisions per curiam. Cases reported on page 801 et seq. are those in which orders were entered. The opinion reported on page 1301 et seq. is that written in chambers by an individual Justice. Page Aaron; Brown Group, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Aaron; Brown Shoe Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Aaron v. Cunningham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031,1143 Abandy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Abate v. Walton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026 Abbott v. Pipefitters Local Union No. 522 Benefit Plan . . . . . . . . 1111 ABB Vetco Gray, Inc.; Hines v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Abdallah v. United Savings Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Abdelsayed; Narumanchi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Abdullah v. Milonas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Abdullah v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Abebe-Jiri; Negewo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Abel; Giffler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Abele Assoc. v. Allegheny Cty. Bd. of Prop. Assess., App. & Rev. 868 Abidekun v. Commissioner of Social Services of New York City 891 Abidekun v. Coombe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Abou-Kassem v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Abraham; Selby v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Abraham v. Young . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Abrahams v. Young & Rubicam Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Abrams v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925,947,1038 Acevedo; Huss v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Acevedo Gutierrez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Achilles Corp. v. Kaepa, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Acker; Jefferson County v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 Acklen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Acosta; Yawczak v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Acosta Coronado v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 ACS Construction Co. of Miss.; Parkson Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 vii Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR viii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Acty v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Acura of Bellevue v. Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Adams, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004 Adams v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Adams v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Adams v. Burlington Northern R. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Adams v. CSX Transportation, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Adams; CSX Transportation, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Adams v. Cumberland Farms, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Adams v. Florida Dept. of Veterans Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Adams; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Adams v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904,940,973,1047,1049 Adams County Detention Facility; White v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Adelman v. Mercy Catholic Medical Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Adelphia Cable; Noel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Adesanya v. Prunty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1062 Adigwu v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Adkins; Mahern v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Advanced Communications Corp. v. FCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 Afaneh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 African Union Meth. Prot. Church and Connection v. Mother Afri- can Union First Colored Meth. Prot. Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Agostini v. Felton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086 Agostini; Felton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Agribank, FCB; Goetzman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Aguilar v. New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852,1023 Aguilar v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Aguilar Riley Ozmen v. New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985,1072 Ahmed v. Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Ainge v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Ajugwo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Akbar-El v. Wise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Akins v. Richardson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Alabama; Carlton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Alabama; Collins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Alabama; Grayson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Alabama; Land v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Alabama; McConico v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Alabama; Peagler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Alabama; Slaton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Alabama; Sockwell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Alabama; Taylor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Alabama; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Alabama Dept. of Ed.; Moody v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED ix Page Alabama State Bar; Asam v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Alabama State Bar; Lindsey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Alachua County School Bd.; N. B. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Alaska v. Babbitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Alaska; Foutch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Alaska; Mendenhall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Alaska; Todd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Alaska; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025,1038 Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n; Carlson v. . . . . . . . 1101 Albanese v. Federal Election Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Alberto Pelaez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Albertson's, Inc.; Everman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Albino v. Machado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Albright; Ballard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Albuquerque v. Church on Rock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Aldi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Aldrich v. General Public Utilities Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Aldridge v. Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Aldy; Valmet Oy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Aleman v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Alexander v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Alexander; Systems Fuel, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Alexandria Physicians Group, Ltd.; Power v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Al-Harbi v. Citibank, N. A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Ali v. Dugger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Ali v. Gomez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Ali v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 A. L. L.; Allred v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Allah v. Vaughn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Allard v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Allders International (Ships) Ltd. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Allegheny County; DeSarno v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Allegheny Cty. Bd. of Prop. Assess., App. & Rev.; Abele Assoc. v. 868 Allemnore Community Hospital v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Allen, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Allen v. Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Allen v. Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Allen v. Price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Allen; Rawlins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016,1102 Allen v. Unison Transformer Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Allen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841,1033,1070 Allgood v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930,1035 Allphin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Allred v. A. L. L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR x TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page All Right, Title and Interest in Real Property and Appurtenances Thereto Known as 143­147 East 23d St., N. Y. v. United States 816 Allstate Ins. Co.; Walters v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1022 Almero v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Almodovar v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Almonte-Nunez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Alonso v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Alston, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Alston v. Guillory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Alt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Altamirano v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Altimus v. Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Altman; Ronwin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Altschul v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065,1066 Altschul v. Texas Bd. of Pardons and Parole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Altschul v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Alvarado-Delgado v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Alvarez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019,1082 Alvarez-Machain; Sosa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Alver v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843,891 Alzate-Yepez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Amato v. Richmond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Amayo v. Paul Revere Ins. Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 957,1054,1075,1103 Amen-Ra v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 American Airlines, Inc.; Cheek v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 American Bankers Mortgage Corp. v. FHLMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 American Bankers Mortgage Corp. v. Freddie Mac . . . . . . . . . . . 812 American Bar Assn.; Rohan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 American Bd. of Plastic Surgery; Soignier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 American Broadcasting Cos. v. BankAtlantic Financial Corp. . . . 867,979 American Civil Liberties Union; Reno v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025 American Civil Liberties Union of Miss., Inc.; King v. . . . . . . . . . 992 American Deposit Corp. v. Schacht . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 American Diversified Investment Corp.; Sahni v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 American Express Co.; Fields v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882,1001 American Express Travel Related Services Co.; Brown v. . 837,896,1049 American Home Products, Inc.; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 913 American Honda Motor Co.; Montag v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 American Institute of Law, Econ. & Comp. Studies v. Cenlar FSB 823 American Legion Post No. 3 v. Separation of Church & State Comm. 1038 American Life & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Trostel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1104 American National Red Cross; Hall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 American Nonwovens, Inc.; Moses v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xi Page American Savings Bank, F. A.; Wyshak v. . . . . . . . . . 866,950,1023,1035 American Telephone & Telegraph Co. of Mich.; Zimmer v. . . . . . . 910 America Speaks v. America's Talking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 America Speaks v. Cable National Broadcasting Co. . . . . . . . . . . 1058 America's Talking; America Speaks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 America's Talking; Murray v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Ameritas Investment Corp. v. Slinkard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Amerson v. Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Ames v. Kelly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Ames v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Amiri v. U. S. Marshals Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Amitin v. Maryland Dept. of Social Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Amoco Energy Trading Corp. v. FERC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Amoco Oil Co.; Schaumburg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 AMREP, Inc.; Busch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Anchondo v. Cyprus Minerals Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Anchors v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Anderskow v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Anderson, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Anderson v. Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Anderson v. Dortch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814,1143 Anderson v. Envirotest Technologies, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Anderson v. Fischbach & Moore, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876,1023 Anderson v. Groose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Anderson v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814,1143 Anderson; Macaluso v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Anderson v. Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Anderson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827,956,1100,1132 Anderson Community School Corp.; K. R. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Anderson Studios; Macaluso v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Andrade v. Burlingame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Andrade v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Andress v. Cleveland Independent School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Andrews; Sheffield v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Andrews v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016,1071 Andrews; Wills v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Andrick v. Pool Energy Services Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Andrzejewski v. California Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. . . . . 1095,1156 Andy Cook's Truck Stop v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Angelo Morales; Calderon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1001 Angelone v. Bennett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 959 Angelone; Bennett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1002 Angelone; Coe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Angelone; Coleman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848,884 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Angelone; George v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1103 Angelone v. Montcalm Publishing Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Angino v. Board of Supervisors of Middle Paxton Township . . . . 823 Anheuser-Busch, Inc.; John Labatt Ltd. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Anjelica Nurseries, Inc. v. Corado-Ceron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Anthony v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Anton; United States ex rel. Hopper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Antonelli v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Antonio Duque v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Antonio Perez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Antonio Santiago v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 A­1 Contractors; Strate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 A. O. Smith Corp.; Klehr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1073 Aparacio-Rodriguez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Apfel, Levy, Zlotnick & Co.; David v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Aponte-Velazquez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Appawoo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Appellate Div., Sup. Ct. of N. Y., First Jud. Dept.; Marinoff v. 998,1143 Archer v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Archuleta v. Farmington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Ard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Ardell v. Stark & Stark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Arena Sports, Inc. v. First American Bank of Va. . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Arewa v. Gearinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Argento v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Arias v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Arizona; Adams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Arizona; Arizona Central R. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Arizona; Betancourt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Arizona; DePiano v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Arizona; Gallegos v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Arizona; Greenwalt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1102 Arizona; Hedlund v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Arizona; Hess v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Arizona; Hyde v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Arizona; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Arizona; Kemp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Arizona; Laird v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Arizona; McCall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Arizona; McCoy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Arizona; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Arizona; Murray v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Arizona; Roscoe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Arizona; Schurz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xiii Page Arizona; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Arizona; Spears v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Arizona; Towery v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Arizona; Tripati v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Arizona Central R. Co. v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Arkansas v. Bradford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Arkansas v. Donovan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Arkansas v. Farm Credit Services of Central Ark. . . . . . . . . . . 805,1085 Arkansas; Jessep v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Arkansas; Kemp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Arkansas; Misskelley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Arkansas; Nance v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Arkansas; Reams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Arkansas; Wooten v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Arkansas; York v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Arkansas State Univ.; Labickas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Arkansas Term Limits v. Donovan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958,1149 Arkoma Production Co. v. Klein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Arline v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 Armendariz-Mata v. Department of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Armentrout v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Armontrout; Ruff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Armstrong; Boyd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Armstrong; Calder v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Armstrong v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Armstrong Law Offices; Bergmann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Army Claims Service; O'Connor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Arnold v. Boatmen's National Bank of Belleville . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Arnold v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019,1033,1155 Arnold and Baker Farms v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Arocho Gonzalez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Arroyo Jusino v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1048 Arroyo-Reyes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 Arteaga v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Arteaga v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097,1157 Arthur v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Artuz; Blake v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Artuz; Maietta v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Artuz; Shabazz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Arvada; Chavez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Asam, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Asam v. Alabama State Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Asam v. Disciplinary Bd. of Ala. State Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814,1001 Ash v. Swest, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Ashcroft; Tyler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Asher v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Ashford v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Ashland County; Jaakkola v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Ashley v. Huntsville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Ashton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Askew v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Askew v. West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Associated Univs., Inc.; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Associates Commercial Corp. v. Rash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086,1106 Associate Tribal Judge v. A­1 Contractors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 Association. For labor union, see name of trade. Association for Telecommunications Servs. v. Iowa Util. Bd. . . . . 978 Atamian v. Chin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Atcheson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co.; Inter-Modal Rail Employees Assn. v. 1003,1089 Atherton v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Atkins, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961,1145 Atkins v. Goord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Atkinson v. Oglesby Plant Laboratories, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037 Atlanta; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Atlanta City School Dist.; Dowling v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Atlantic Science & Technology, Inc. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . 809 AT&T Corporate Headquarters; Jacob v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 AT&T Family Fed. Credit Union v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. 1148 Attorney General v. American Civil Liberties Union . . . . . . . . . . 1025 Attorney General v. Bossier Parish School Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Attorney General; Cisneros v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Attorney General; Dee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873,1001 Attorney General; Lassiter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Attorney General; Plumbers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Attorney General; Tlaga v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Attorney General; zu Mike v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Attorney General of Ala.; Owes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Attorney General of Cal. v. Doe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947,976 Attorney General of Cal.; Doe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947,976 Attorney General of Colo.; Marin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Attorney General of Fla.; Hogan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Attorney General of Fla.; McLeod v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Attorney General of Fla.; Medina v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025 Attorney General of Fla.; Mills v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1024 Attorney General of Fla.; Siers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Attorney General of Ga.; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Attorney General of Ind.; Wright v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xv Page Attorney General of La. v. CIGNA Healthplan of La., Inc. . . . . . 964 Attorney General of La.; McGee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Attorney General of La.; Ross v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Attorney General of Miss.; Dupree v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1103 Attorney General of Miss. v. Ingebretsen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Attorney General of Miss.; Lawson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Attorney General of N. M.; Wilson Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Attorney General of N. Y. v. Quill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 Attorney General of Ohio; Children's Healthcare Is Legal Duty v. 1149 Attorney General of Okla.; Rodriguez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Attorney General of Pa.; Lutz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Attorney General of Tex.; Black v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Attorney General of Tex.; Salazar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Attorney General of Va.; McIntyre v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Attorney General of Wash.; Gravel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Attorney Grievance Comm'n; Loss v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md.; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Attorney Regist. & Discip. Comm'n, Sup. Ct. of Ill.; Bell v. . . . . . 905 Aubin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Auburn; O'Neill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Audia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 Auer v. Robbins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452,924,946,979 Augustine v. Roe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Ault; Sims v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Austin v. Owens-Brockway Glass Container, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Austin; Persimmon Hollow Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Autek Systems Corp. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Auto Glass Employees Fed. Credit Union; Automobile Workers v. 814 Automobile Workers v. Auto Glass Employees Fed. Credit Union 814 Automotive Rentals, Inc.; McAdams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 AutoZone, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Avena v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Awkal v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Ayeboua v. District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880,1024 Ayer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Ayers v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Azeez v. Duncil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Azhocar v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Aziz v. Schriro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Azubuko v. Board of Trustees, Framingham State College . . . . . 1134 B. v. Alachua County School Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 B. v. S. L. J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Baba v. Japan Travel Bureau International, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Baba v. Warren Management Consultants, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 840,1022 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Babbitt; Alaska v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Babbitt v. Youpee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 Babineaux v. Klevenhagen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Bacchi v. Senkowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Baez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Bailey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068,1137 Baird v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Baker; Flattum v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Baker; Goudy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Baker v. Independent Order of Foresters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Baker v. Lusk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Baker; McQueen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Baker v. Phoenix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979 Baker v. Runyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1023 Baker v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905,1020,1140 Bakery Centre Associates; Orientations Gallery, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . 812 Balasubramani v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. . . . 868 Balawajder v. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Balboa v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Balcazar v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Baldwin; McKinney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Baldwin Hardware Corp.; Klayman & Associates, P. C. v. . . . . . . 949 Baldwinville; Kahre-Richardes Family Foundation, Inc. v. . . . . . . 869 Balint v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Ball v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Ball; Interoceanica Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Ballard v. Albright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Ballard v. Kapila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Ballard v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Ballew v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Balog v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Balter v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Baltimore City Jail; Oriakhi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.; Hopkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Bane v. Sprouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 BankAtlantic Financial Corp.; American Broadcasting Cos. v. . . 867,979 Bankers Trust Co.; Blytheville Compress Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Banknote Corp. of America, Inc. v. NLRB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Banko v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Bd. of Pa. . . . . . . . . . 885 Bank of Baroda; Indu Craft, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Bank of N. Y. v. Continental Airlines, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057,1156 Bank One Columbus, N. A.; O'Brien v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Bank One, Indianapolis, N. A.; Frey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Banks, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xvii Page Banks v. Sikes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Banks; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Banks v. Thomas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Banks v. Witt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Bankston v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co. . . . . . . . 891,1001 Banshee v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Baptiste v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Baptist Medical Center Princeton; Coughlin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Barbee v. Electronic Data Systems Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Barbee v. Philadelphia School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Barber v. Hallmark Cards, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Barber v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Barberena-Jimenez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841,1023 Barbour; Gossage v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Barclays Bank of N. Y.; Heady v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Barclays Bank of N. Y.; Heady Electric Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Bardsley, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Barfield v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 Barker v. Kernan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Barkley v. Conner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Barnes v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Barnes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853,857,986,1001,1100 Barnett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Baron v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Barone, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004,1146 Barone v. Feldmeyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Barr, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Barr v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Barrera; Michigan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945 Barrett v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Barron v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060,1135 Barry v. Burdines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Barry; Little v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Barry v. Pennsylvania Higher Ed. Assistance Agency . . . . . . . . . 834 Barry v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Barth, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Barth v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860,1023 Bartholic v. Stewart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121,1153 Barton v. Landmark Land Co. of Carolina, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Barton v. Morris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Barton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Bartron, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026 Bascue v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Basey v. Herklotz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Basich v. Board of Pensions, Evangelical Luth. Church in Am. 810 Basinger v. CSX Transportation, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Basket v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Bast v. Glasberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Bast v. U. S. Court of Appeals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Bastidas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902,986 Bates v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Bates v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884,1108 Baticados v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Battle v. Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Battle; Fields v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801 Baucum v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Bauer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068,1131 Baugher v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Bausch & Lomb, Inc.; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850,1035 Bay Area Laundry and Dry Cleaning Pension Trust Fund v. Ferbar Corp. of Cal., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Bayer; Calder v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Bayliner Marine Corp.; Powers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Bayshore National Bank of La Porte v. Evans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Bazel v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Beagles v. Department of Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Beals v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Beam; Logan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Bean v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Beasley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Beaver v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Beavers v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060,1070 Becerra v. Dalton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Bechtel Energy Corp. v. Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Beck; Pittsburgh v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Becker; Committee of Dental Amalgam Alloy Mfrs. and Distrs. v. 1084 Becker; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Becker v. Southwest Travis County Road Dist. No. 1 . . . . . . . . 933,1024 Beckey v. Cenlar Federal Savings Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Becton, Dickinson & Co.; Dunmeyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Bedonie v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Began; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Beicker Engineering, Inc.; Kahn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965,1071 Belanger; Ramirez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Belcher v. Lesley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Bell v. Attorney Regist. & Discip. Comm'n, Sup. Ct. of Ill. . . . . . 905 Bell v. Hallandale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Bell v. Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xix Page Bell v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Bell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Bell v. U. S. Postal Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Bell Atlantic-Md., Inc.; Cleckner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Co. v. Jarrell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Benet-Melendez; Hall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Benge v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Bennett v. Angelone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1002 Bennett; Angelone v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 959 Bennett v. Law Firm of Jones, Waldo, Holbrook & McDonough . . 1108 Bennett; Neuman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Bennett; Pippin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817,1022 Bennett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Bennington College Corp.; Logan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Benoit v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Benson v. Communications Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Benson; Fenney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Benson; Phea v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Benson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Benson; Wayne v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Bentley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850,1066 Benton, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806,1035 Ben Yahweh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Beretta U. S. A. Corp.; Stiltner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Berge; Galowski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Berger; McDaniel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Bergmann v. Armstrong Law Offices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Bergmann v. Erdmann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Bergquist; Wishnatsky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895,1024 Bergstrom v. Dalkon Shield Claimants Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Berk v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Berkeley Marina Marriott Management; Iqbal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Berkey; Krivonak v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842,1143 Berkley v. Department of Army . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997,1072 Berman; Washington Times Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Bernal-Arroyave v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Berndt v. Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Bernklau v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Bernstein v. National Transportation Safety Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Bernys v. Wing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Berry; Preston v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Berry v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Bertagnolli, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961 Berthelot; Lee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Beshears; Witherspoon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Best v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Best v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Betancourt v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Betancourt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Bevere; Helbling v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Bevil v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Bexar County Tax Office; Crawford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Bey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Beyer; Russo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984,1072 Beyond, Inc.; Paulsen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Bibbings; Witherspoon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Bibles v. Oregon Natural Desert Assn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 BIC Corp. v. Carney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 BIC Corp.; Thompson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Bickel; Korean Air Lines Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Biddulph v. Mortham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Bienvenu; Simmons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Bierley v. Franz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954,1036 Bierley v. Walters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843,1102 Bigpond v. Champion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1072 Billis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900,1024 Billman v. Department of Human Services, Franklin County . . . . 1041 Billmyer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Billy-Eko v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Bi-Lo, Inc.; Craven v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Bindana Investments Co. Ltd. v. Knee Deep Cattle Co. . . . . . . . . 1144 Binderup v. Brooks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Bio-Technology General Corp. v. Genentech, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Bisaccia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Bishop v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Bishop v. State Bar of Ga. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Bishop v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Bisson; Furrow v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Black v. Morales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Black v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Blackiston v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Blackman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Blackmon v. Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Blackshear; Fischer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Blagg v. Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Blais v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Blake v. Artuz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Blake v. Murray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxi Page Blalock v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Blanchard v. Williams, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Bland v. Fessler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Blandino v. Lindler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1102 Blandino v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Blank v. Hawkesworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Blentech Corp.; Ruiz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Blessing v. Freestone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979 Blinder v. Hoxworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Blodgett; LaRue v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Blue v. Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Ohio v. Schachner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Okla., Inc.; Cannon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Blue Diamond Coal Co. v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Blytheville Compress Co. v. Bankers Trust Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 B&M Farms v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 BMW of North America, Inc.; Sitkoff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Board of County Comm'rs of Cleveland County v. Shinault . . . . . 1078 Board of Ed. of City School Dist. of Watervliet v. Russman . . . . . 1106 Board of Immigration Appeals; Everett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Board of Medical Examiners of Ariz.; Rosen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053 Board of Pensions, Evangelical Luth. Church in Am.; Basich v. 810 Board of Regents of Univ. of Wis. System; Frey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Board of Regents, Univ. of Mich.; Yohn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Board of Selectmen for Canton; Fuller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849,1035 Board of Supervisors of Middle Paxton Township; Angino v. . . . . 823 Board of Trustees, Framingham State College; Azubuko v. . . . . . 1134 Board of Trustees of City Univ. of N. Y.; Soffer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Board of Trustees of Univ. of N. H.; Burgess v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Boateng v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Boatmen's National Bank of Belleville; Arnold v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Boblett v. Terry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Boccella v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Bock; Unigard Security Ins. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Boerne v. Flores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1088 Boggi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Boggs v. Boggs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 957,1039,1089 Bojorquez-Gastelum v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Bolden; Morton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Bolden v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998,1119 Bolt v. Ptarmigan Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Boltach v. Dexter Township . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Bolton v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Bond v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Boney v. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Bonnette v. Odeco Oil & Gas Co., Drilling Division . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Bono v. Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Bonta v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Bonty v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Booker; Howell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Booker v. Ward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Boone v. Tompkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Boone v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Booth v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Boothby; Crane v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Boots v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Borcsik v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Borden, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Borg; MacInnes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Borjesson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Borough. See name of borough. Borromeo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Bosse; Rayford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Bossier; Bridges v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Bossier Parish School Bd.; Price v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Bossier Parish School Bd.; Reno v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Bostic v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Bostitch Co.; Lawal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Boston; Gillen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Boston Pointe Corp.; Popejoy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Botaba Realty Co.; Lake at Las Vegas Investors Group, Inc. v. . . 863 Botello v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Botello Cervantes v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Bottoson v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Botzheim; Gregory v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Boulden v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Boulineau v. West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Bounds v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Bovis v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Bowden v. Public Building Comm'n of Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Bowden v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Bowen v. Thurman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Bowers v. Saturn General Motors Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Bowers; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Bowersox v. Driscoll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Bowersox; Gibson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Bowersox; Heistand v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Bowersox; Ivy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxiii Page Bowersox; Lawrence v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937,1036 Bowersox; Lowe-Bey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Bowersox; Schleeper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Bowersox; Schneider v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Bowersox; Tyler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Bowersox; Zeitvogel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1036 Bowlen; Carter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Bowlin v. Mease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Bowling; Bowman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844,987 Bowling v. Cates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Bowman v. Bowling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844,987 Bowman v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854,881 Bowman v. Runyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Bowyer v. Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Box; Griffin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Boyce v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Boyd v. Armstrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Boyd; Cook v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891,1024 Boyd v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Boyd v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Boyd v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Boyer; Parker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Boyett v. Tomberlin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Boyle v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Boyle v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Boynton; Brooks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 BP Chemicals Ltd. v. Hoechst Celanese Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Brabson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 Bracco Diagnostics Inc.; Generic Pharmaceutical Industry v. . . . . 1101 Bracco Diagnostics Inc. v. Kessler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Bracy v. Gramley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1074,1106 Bradford; Arkansas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Bradley v. Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Bradley v. Meko . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Bradshaw v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Brady, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990,1074 Brady v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Brahms-Garcia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Brancato v. Grady . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Branch v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Branscum v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Branton; Salmon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Braswell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Braun v. Lorillard, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Brawner v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Bray v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Bray v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Breast Implant Tort Claimants Represented by O'Quinn, Keren- sky, McAninch & Laminack v. Dow Corning Corp. . . . . . . . . . . 1071 Breeden; Jonathan Woodner Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148,1149 Bregar v. Cleveland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Bretschneider v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889,1024 Bretzing v. Harvey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Brewer, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Brewer v. Puckett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844,1001 Brewington v. Woodard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Brewster; Moore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Bridgeport; Finizie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Bridges v. Bossier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Bridgetown Grill; Lawal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Briggs; Holden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Brighton Management Services v. Philadelphia Tax Review Bd. 966 Brimage v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Brimfield v. Leonard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Brimfield; Leonard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Brine v. Iowa Bd. of Regents and Univ. of Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Brinkley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Brink's Ltd.; South African Airways v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Briscoe v. Gammon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Brito v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Britton; Crawford-El v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 Broad v. Sealaska Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Broadnax v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Brocchini v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Brock v. Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Brockamp; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 Broderick v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Brodnicki v. Omaha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Bromley; Michigan Ed. Assn.-NEA v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Bronson v. Walker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062,1067 Brookins v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Brooks; Binderup v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Brooks v. Boynton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Brooks v. George County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Brooks v. Pataki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Brooks v. Price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Brooks v. Sheppard Air Force Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Brooks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxv Page Brooktrails Community Services Dist. Bd. of Directors; Paland v. 1124 Brosky v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Brotherhood. For labor union, see name of trade. Broussard v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Brousse; Reiman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Broward County; Kuchinskas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Browder v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Brown, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923,961,1026,1053,1107 Brown v. American Express Travel Related Services Co. . . . . 837,896,1049 Brown; Arroyo Jusino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1048 Brown; Ball v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Brown; Bretschneider v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889,1024 Brown v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . 1015,1085 Brown v. Ferguson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1036 Brown v. First State Bank of Harvard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Brown v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Brown v. Georgia Dept. of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Brown; Grimmett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 Brown v. Gross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Brown v. Gunn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Brown; Hall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Brown v. Hampton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Brown; Hampton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Brown; Henderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Brown v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881,970 Brown v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Brown; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967,1049 Brown v. Kristianson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Brown; March v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Brown v. Maryland Dept. of Health and Mental Hygiene . . . . . . . 882 Brown v. Mendel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Brown v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Brown v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Brown; Philadelphia Tribune Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Brown v. Rubin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897,1024 Brown v. Sanford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Brown v. South Carolina Bd. of Comm'rs of Judicial Standards . . 1116 Brown v. Stepanik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Brown v. Story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Brown v. Tommie Ray's . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Brown; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Brown v. Turpin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Brown v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820, 844,875,939,940,1021,1046,1059,1060,1084,1100,1140 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Brown v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Brown v. West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Brown v. Yount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Browner; Virginia v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Brown-Forman Beverage Co., Wine Div.; Viviano Wine Importers v. 1078 Brown-Forman Corp.; Viviano Wine Importers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Brown Group, Inc. v. Aaron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Browning; Hall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Brown-Kimble v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Brown & Root Industrial Services, Inc.; Sims v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Brown's Furniture, Inc. v. Zehnder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Brown Shoe Co. v. Aaron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.; Adams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Bruce v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Bruder; Mincieli v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Bruen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Brunson v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Brunson v. Los Angeles County Superior Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Bryan v. Richardson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Bryan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Bryan Independent School Dist.; Rowinsky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Bryant v. Bryant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Bryant v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Bryant; Indiana v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926 Bryant v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Brytus; Spang & Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Buc-Hanan v. Nishi/Hompa Hongwaji Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Buchanan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Buchholzer; Reynolds v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Buchholzer; Reynolds Fisheries v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Buchler; Sprosty v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Buck v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Buckley; Metro-North Commuter R. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958 Buckner v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Buenoano v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Buice's Estate v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Co. . . . 863 Buker v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Bulgier v. Department of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Bullen; Kokoska v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Bullen; Visiting Nurse Assn. of North Shore, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Bullock v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Bulson; Burnett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Bunnell; Sims v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Burdines; Barry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxvii Page Burford v. Steptoe & Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Burger v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Burgess v. Board of Trustees of Univ. of N. H. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Burgess v. Nitzschke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Burgos v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Burgos v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Burke; Daniels v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Burke v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Burks; Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Burks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Burlingame; Andrade v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Burlington Northern R. Co.; Adams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Burlington Northern R. Co.; Cobb v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Burlington Northern R. Co.; Stiffarm v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Burnett v. Bulson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Burnett v. Riggle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Burnett v. Woods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Burns; Myers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Burns; Simmons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Burns v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Burrell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Burrows; Lazich v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Burrows v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Burton v. Burton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Burton v. Christopher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Busby, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924,1053 Busch v. AMREP, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Bush, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945,957 Bush v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945 Bush v. Hesse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Bush v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Buss America, Inc.; Wolf v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866,1023 Butler; Cole's Estate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Butler v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Butler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967,1155 Butler Co.; Ortiz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Butterworth; Hogan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Butterworth; McLeod v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Butterworth; Medina v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025 Butterworth; Mills v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1024 Butterworth; Siers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Buzea v. Stanhope Hotel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854,1102 Byles; Wade v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Byrd v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page C.; Central Regional School Dist. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866,979 C. v. Los Angeles County Dept. of Children's Services . . . . . . . . . 1081 Cable National Broadcasting Co.; America Speaks v. . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Cable National Broadcasting Co.; Murray v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Cabrera-Baez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Cabrera-Sosa v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Caesar's Tahoe, Inc.; Lurie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Caffey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Cain; Bolton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Cain; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Cain; Kelly v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Cain; Mayeux v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Cain; Messick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Cain; Mosby v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Cain; Nicholas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Cain; Shilling v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Cain; Stallings v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Cain; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Cain; Thorne v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Cain; Tobias v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Cain; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. v. Central La. Electric Co. 808 Cal-Almond, Inc. v. Department of Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Cal-Almond, Inc. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Calder v. Armstrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Calder v. Bayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Calderon v. Angelo Morales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1001 Calderon v. Caswell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052 Calderon; Kukes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Calderon v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Caldwell v. Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Caldwell v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Caldwell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 California; Arias v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 California; Armstrong v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 California; Arteaga v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 California; Barnes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 California; Baugher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 California; Bovis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 California; Brunson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 California; Carter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 California; Chavez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 California; Contreras v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 California; Coronado v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxix Page California; Cross v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904,1026,1153 California; Dalis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 California; Davenport v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 California; Faruqui v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825,1022 California; Ford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 California; Galloway v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 California; Gardner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 California; Gilliam v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 California; Grass v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 California; Hallgrimson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 California; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 California; Harrison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 California; Hastings v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 California; Hennessy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 California; Horton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 California; Hoversten v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 California; Jaime Avena v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 California; Keem v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 California; KGET­TV Channel 17 v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 California; Lucas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 California; Mark v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 California; McHenry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 California; Medina v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 California; Memro v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 California v. Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 California; Mitchell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 California; Ochoa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 California; Osband v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 California; Padilla v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 California; Ponce-Partida v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 California; Ray v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 California; Reed v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 California; Reyes Miranda v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 California; Rosenbalm v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 California v. Roy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,1071 California; Rutherford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 California; Sanchez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 California; Sanders v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 California; Shoemaker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805,991,1085 California; Sorton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 California; Sperling v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 California; United States ex rel. Devlin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 California; Velez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 California; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895,1045 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page California; Yin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 California; Zdun v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 California Bd. of Psychology; Jensen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 California Dept. of Social Services; Steele v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952,1036 California Div. of Labor Stds. Enforcement v. Dillingham Constr. 316 California Franchise Tax Bd. v. MacFarlane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925 California Pacific Medical Center; Copy-Mor, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 California Public Utilities Comm'n; Dotson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 California State Bar; Harney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 California State Humane Society; Hershey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 California Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.; Andrzejewski v. . . . . 1095,1156 Call v. Gomez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Call; Heard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Callins v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Calvert, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Camacho v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975,1128 Cambas Hernandez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Cambra; Madrid v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Camilli v. Industrial Comm'n of Ariz. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Camilo Montoya v. Stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Campbell, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Campbell v. McCarthy Brothers Co./Clark Bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Campbell v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Campbell v. Quad City Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Campbell v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Campbell; Sweatt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Campbell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897,954 Campbell v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943,1036 Campbell v. Zolin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Campos v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Campos Perez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . 1081 Canadian Consulate v. Holden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Canady; Wronke v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Canatella v. Carr, McClellan, Ingersoll, Thompson & Horn . . . . . 853 Cancil v. Florida Dept. of State, Division of Licensing . . . . . . . . . 849 Can Do, Inc., Pension and Profit Sharing Plan and Successor Plans v. Manier, Herod, Hollabaugh & Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Cannady v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Cannon v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Okla., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Cannon v. Group Health Service of Okla., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Cantrell; Lowe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Cantu v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906,985 Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.; Tilton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Capital Welding & Fabrication, Inc.; McDermott, Inc. v. . . . . . . . 945 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxxi Page Cappello; Duncan Aircraft Sales of Fla., Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Card v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Cardan v. Superior Court of Cal., Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . 888 Carey v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Cargill; Poly v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Cargill Associates; Poly v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Cargle v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Caribbean Petroleum Corp. v. Coastal Fuels of P. R., Inc. . . . . . . 927 Caribbean Petroleum Corp.; Coastal Fuels of P. R., Inc. v. . . . . . . 927 Carillo v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Carl v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Carlos; Shoemaker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Carlson v. Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n . . . . . . . 1101 Carlson; Thiry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Carlton v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Carlton; Metcalf v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Carmen v. Mayo Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Carmona de la Torre v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 Carnahan; Tyler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833,876 Carney; BIC Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Caron, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004 Carpenter v. Chapleau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Carpenter; Denver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Carpenter v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Carr v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851,1023 Carr v. Runyan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Carrasquillo; Marcus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Carr, McClellan, Ingersoll, Thompson & Horn; Canatella v. . . . . . 853 Carroll; Khalil v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Carroll v. Local 144 Pension Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834,1001 Carter v. Bowlen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Carter v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Carter; Hogan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Carter v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Carter v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 Carter; Wright v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Casanova v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 Casler; Cotten v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Caspari; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Casper v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Cassidy; Connecticut v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Castaneda v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Casteel v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Castillo, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Castillo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868,875,893 Castillo Reyes v. Manuel Solloso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Castro; Gnadt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Castro v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Castro v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Castro Quintana v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Caswell; Calderon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052 Caterino; Futernick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Caterino; Holiday West Mobile Home Park v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Cates; Bowling v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Cathcart v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908,1034 Caton-Garcia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Cave v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Caves v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Cazalet; Flanagan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Cazier v. NationsBanc Mortgage Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 C&C Produce v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 C & D Charter Power Systems, Inc. v. NLRB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Ceballos v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893,1001 Ceccarani v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Cecil v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Cedar Point Oil Co. v. Sierra Club, Lone Star Chapter . . . . . . . . 811 Cenlar FSB; Am. Institute of Law, Econ. & Comp. Studies v. . . . 823 Cenlar FSB; Beckey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 CenTra, Inc. v. Garavaglia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Central Cartage v. Central States, S. E. and S. W. Area Pens. Fd. 912 Central Fla. Medical Affiliates, Inc.; Levine v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Central Life Assurance Co.; Spear, Leeds & Kellogg v. . . . . . . . . 1040 Central La. Electric Co.; Cajun Electric Power Cooperative v. 808 Central Regional School Dist. v. M. C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866,979 Central States, S. E. and S. W. Area Pens. Fd.; Central Cartage v. 912 Central States, S. E. & S. W. Areas Pens. Fd.; Central Transport v. 811 Central States, S. E. & S. W. Areas Pens. Fd.; Mason & Dixon Lines v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Central Transport v. Central States, S. E. & S. W. Areas Pens. Fd. 811 Cepak; Simpson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Certain Real Property Located at 11869 Westshore Drive, Putnam Township, Livingston County v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Cervantes v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Cesnik; Edgewood Baptist Church v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Cesnik; New Beginnings Adoption and Counseling Agency v. . . . 1110 Chafin; Peck v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Chagrin Falls v. Kruse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxxiii Page Chakales v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Chalmars v. Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Chambers v. Halford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Chambers v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Champion; Bigpond v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1072 Champion; Fritz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Champion v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Chancellor, Bd. of Ed. of New York City v. Felton . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086 Chance Management, Inc. v. South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Chandler v. Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1051 Chandler v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Chapel Hill; Howard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822,1022 Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Bd. of Ed.; Reinhard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Chapleau; Carpenter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Chapman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Chapman v. Vander Ark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Chappell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Charles Hayden Goodwill Inn School; Martins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Charles Schwab & Co.; Dahl v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Charles Taylor Construction Co. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Charlevoix County; Lochman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Charlotte; McClure v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Charlton v. Paramus Bd. of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Chase v. Lockheed Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Chase v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Chase Taxidermy Supply Co. v. Superior Form Builders, Inc. . . . 809 Chater; Alexander v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Chater; Blue Diamond Coal Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Chater; Gomez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Chater; Haas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Chater; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930,985,1085 Chater; Morvant v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Chater; Nestler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Chater; Peterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Chater; Pierce v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Chater; Roark v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Chater; Saelee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Chater; Seeger v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Chater; Thornton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Chater; Ward v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Chaudhary v. O'Neil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833,1035 Chaudhry v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Chavez v. Arvada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Chavez v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Chavez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Cheatham v. Schneider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971,1072 Cheek v. American Airlines, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Cheek v. Horn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc.; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Cheren v. Fitch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Cherisson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Cherry v. Rocking Horse Ridge Estates Assn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Cherry Hills Resort Development Co. v. Cherry Hills Village . . . 825 Cherry Hills Village; Cherry Hills Resort Development Co. v. . . 825 Chesapeake; Jamell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Cheshire v. Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Chester v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Chesterfield County; National Assn. of Home Bldrs. of U. S. v. . . 1056 Chevron Pipe Line Co.; Reed v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Chicago; Dick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Chicago v. Evans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Chicago; Mann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Chicago; Manning v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Chicago; North Avenue Novelties, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Chicago; Retired Chicago Police Assn. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Chicago; Wzorek v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Chicago Steel & Pickling Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env. . . . . . . 1147 Chief Judge, Circuit Court of Fla., Alachua County; Bowling v. 936 Chief Judge, Circuit Court of Fla., Marion County; Waterfield v. 837 Chief Justice, Nevada Supreme Court, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Chief Justice of U. S.; Kimble v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035 Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Tex.; Larry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Childers; Wudtke v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Childree; UAP/GA AG Chem., Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Children's Healthcare Is a Legal Duty, Inc. v. Montgomery . . . . . 1149 Childs v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882,1024 Chiles; Kilo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Chin; Atamian v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Chinn v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845,972 Chittum; Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 Chodos v. Shop Television Network, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Choi; Steele v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Christensen v. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Christians v. Crystal Evangelical Free Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Christman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Christopher; Burton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Christ the Servant Evangelical Lutheran Church; Singleton v. . . 870 Christy; Dodaro v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxxv Page Christy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corp.; Teets v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Chronicle Publishing Co.; Lafayette Morehouse Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . 809 Chrysler Corp. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Chubb LifeAmerica; Ramsey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Chul Choi; Steele v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Chuquimarca v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Churchill; Vogt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Church Mut. Ins. Co. v. Mount Calvary Baptist Church . . . . . . . . 818 Church Mut. Ins. Co. v. Mount Calvary Baptist Church and School 818 Church of Lord Jesus Christ of Apostolic Faith v. Shelton . . . . . . 869 Church on Rock; Albuquerque v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Ciampi; Hannaford Bros. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Ciba-Geigy Corp.; Rosen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Cielto v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 CIGNA Healthplan of La., Inc.; Louisiana ex rel. Ieyoub v. . . . . . 964 CIGNA Worldwide Ins. Co.; Younis Bros. & Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Cihak v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Cimmino; Maceri v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Cindy R. v. James R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Circuit Court of Ill., Rock Island County; Dooling v. . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Circuit Court of Va., Norfolk; McBride v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Circuit Court of Wis., LaCrosse County; LeFebre v. . . . . . . . . . . 842 Cisneros v. Reno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Cisneros-Silva v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Citation Oil & Gas Corp.; Weller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Citibank, N. A.; Al-Harbi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Citicorp Credit Services, Inc.; Webb v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Citicorp Savings of Ill.; Rucker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818,1048 Citizen v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Citizens for a Better Env.; Chicago Steel & Pickling Co. v. . . . . . 1147 Citizens for a Better Env.; Steel Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Citizens for a Better Env.-Cal.; Union Oil Co. of Cal. v. . . . . . . . . 1101 Citizens' Utility Ratepayer Bd. v. Kansas Pipeline Partnership . . 1115 City. See name of city. City National Bank; Neuton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979,1079 City & State Factors, Inc.; Hill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969,1085 Clagett v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Clardy Mfg. Co. v. Marine Midland Business Loans, Inc. . . . . . . . 1078 Clark; Koch Fuels, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Clark v. Portland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Clark v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909,1083 Clarke; Allen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Clarke; Key v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839,1001 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Clarke v. Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Clarke; Portee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Clarke; Rust v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Clarke v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Clark Oil Trading Co.; Haberbush v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Class; Jenner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Clay v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877,1001 Clayton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Claywell v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Cleckner v. Bell Atlantic-Md., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Clemons v. Raney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Clenney; Kinsey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Cleveland; Bregar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Cleveland Independent School Dist.; Andress v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Clifton; Hill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Cline v. Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Clinton v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925 Clinton; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Clinton; Sanders v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Clinton; Schwarz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Clinton; Tierney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901,988 Cloird v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Clontz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 CMC Heartland Partners v. Union Pacific R. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . 805,1090 CNG Transmission Corp.; Stitt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Coan v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1023 Coastal Fuels of P. R., Inc. v. Caribbean Petroleum Corp. . . . . . . 927 Coastal Fuels of P. R., Inc.; Caribbean Petroleum Corp. v. . . . . . . 927 Cobb v. Burlington Northern R. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Cobb v. Thurman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Cobb County Bd. of Health; Lawal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Cobb County School Bd.; Ellerbee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Coble v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Coburn v. Morton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Cochran v. CSX Transportation, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Cochran v. Norton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Cochran v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Coe v. Angelone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Coffey v. Winske . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Coffman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Coggins/Continental Granite Co.; Tucker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Cohen; Ebenhart v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Cohen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975,1156 Cohen v. Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxxvii Page Cole v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Cole v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Cole v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Coleman v. Angelone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848,884 Coleman v. Ford Motor Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1075 Coleman v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Coleman; Kaye v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Coleman v. Morton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Coleman v. Murphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Coleman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891,942,1045 Coleman, Shaw, Willous Group, Inc. v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. 1002 Coles v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Cole's Estate v. Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Collard & Roe, Inc.; Klein v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 College of Charleston; Schley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 College Station; Irving v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Colligan v. Trans World Airlines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Collins v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Collins v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Collins v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Colon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Colonial Life Ins. Co. of America; Ramsey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Colorado; Gordon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Colorado; Hill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Colorado; Kansas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Colorado; Saiz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Colorado v. Sanchez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1051 Colorado; Varallo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Colorado ex rel. Simpson; Highland Irrigation Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . 992 Colston v. Madison Correctional Institution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Columbia Machine, Inc. v. Schnidrig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Columbus; Reese v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Colvin v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Comer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Commissioner; Akins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Commissioner; Boulden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Commissioner; Bryan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Commissioner; Chakales v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Commissioner; Doctors Hospital Mgmt. Co., Tax Matters Partner v. 811 Commissioner; Gabel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Commissioner; Karim-Panahi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083,1131,1157 Commissioner; McCall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Commissioner; Orozco v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946 Commissioner; Patch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xxxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Commissioner; Qureshi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Commissioner; Robinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Commissioner; Salter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Commissioner; Santangelo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Commissioner; Serot v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Commissioner; Tseng v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Commissioner; Verbeck v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Commissioner; Vest v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Commissioner of Internal Revenue. See Commissioner. Commissioner of Social Services of New York City; Abidekun v. 891 Committee of Bar Examiners; Day v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Committee of Dental Amalgam Alloy Mfrs. and Distrs. v. Becker 1084 Commodities Export Co. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n; Dunn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465,925 Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n; Schulze v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Commonwealth. See also name of Commonwealth. Commonwealth Edison Co.; Ehredt Underground, Inc. v. . . . . . . . 1056 Commonwealth Edison Co.; Seetharaman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Communications Workers; Benson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Communications Workers; Guerra v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Communications Workers; Ross v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Compton; Haynes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Compton; Subaru of America, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042,1143 Comptroller of Currency; James Madison Ltd. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Comptroller of New York City; Osinowo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Concepcion v. Puerto Rico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Concourse Nursing Home v. Perales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Cone v. Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Conerly v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Conference of African Union First Colored Meth. Prot. Church v. Mother African Union First Colored Meth. Prot. Church . . . . . 1042 Conference of African Union First Colored Meth. Prot. Church v. Scotts African Union Meth. Prot. Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Conforti v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Conkle v. Jeong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Conkle v. Laird's Food Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Conkle v. U. S. Court of Appeals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Conlan v. Department of Labor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Connecticut; Battle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Connecticut v. Cassidy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Connecticut; LaPointe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Connecticut; Marion v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Connecticut; Martin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Connecticut; Richardson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xxxix Page Connecticut; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Conner; Barkley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Connolly v. Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp.; O'Connor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Consolidation Coal Co.; Schultz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Constellation Development Corp. v. Dowden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Construction Products Research, Inc. v. United States . . . . . . . . 927 Continental Airlines, Inc.; Bank of N. Y. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057,1156 Continental Ins. Co.; Simply Fresh Fruit, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Contractors Assn. of Eastern Pa., Inc.; Philadelphia v. . . . . . . . . . 1113 Contreras v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Contreras v. Hawk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Contreras v. Kincheloe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Contreras-Contreras v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd.; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . 1015,1085 Convenient Loan Co.; Kinnell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838,987 Convertino v. Jabe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Cook v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Cook v. Boyd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891,1024 Cook v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Cook v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Cook v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905,932,939 Cooke, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Cook's Truck Stop v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Cookus v. Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Coombe; Abidekun v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Cooper v. Gammon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Cooper v. Malone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855,1001,1062 Cooper v. Missouri Parole Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Cooper v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Cooper v. Tropicana Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Copeland v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Copy-Mor, Inc. v. California Pacific Medical Center . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Corado-Ceron; Anjelica Nurseries, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Corbett; Lutz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Corbin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Cordoba v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Cordova-Perez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Cornell v. Maass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 Cornely v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Cornish v. District of Columbia Bd. on Pro. Responsibility . . . . 869,1023 Coronado v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Coronado v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xl TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Corporacion de Exportaciones Mexicanas USA, Inc. v. Florida Dept. of Business and Professional Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962 Corporation v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945 Corr v. Gannett Pacific Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Corrales v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Correction Management Affiliates, Inc.; Hayes v. . . . . . . . . . . . 881,1024 Corrections Commissioner. See name of commissioner. Corthron v. Riley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Coshocton County; McCracken v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Costa v. Thompson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Cotnam v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Cotroneo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Cotten v. Casler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Cotten v. General Motors Fisher-Body Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Cotter & Co. v. Illinois Property Tax Appeal Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Cotton, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Cotton v. Dorsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Cotton v. Hilbig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860,1071 Couch; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Couchot v. Ohio Lottery Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Coughlin v. Baptist Medical Center Princeton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Coughlin v. Griffin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Coughlin; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Coughlin; Salahuddin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Coulter v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 County. See name of county. County Collection Services, Inc.; Quisenberry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Court of Appeals. See U. S. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals of Minn.; Noltimier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Cuyahoga Cty.; Robinson v. . . 997,1085 Court of Common Pleas of Pa., Allegheny Cty.; Westbrooks v. . . . 889 Court of Criminal Appeals of Okla.; DuBuc v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Cousin v. Office of Thrift Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Cousins v. North Carolina Dept. of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 Cousin-Williams; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Cowan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046,1155 Cowhig v. West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,1022 Cox; Picklesimer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Cox v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Cox v. Treadway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Cox v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Coyle v. Widnall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Crabtree; Thompson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Craft; Lowe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xli Page Craig v. Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Craig Weight Loss Centres, Inc.; Kisala v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Crane v. Boothby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Craven v. Bi-Lo, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Crawford v. Bexar County Tax Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Crawford v. Newkirk-Stewart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Crawford v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903,1138 Crawford-El v. Britton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 Crawley v. Parker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Creamer v. Laidlaw Transit, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1143 Creasey v. Kemna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Credit v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Credit Counseling Centers; Credit Counseling Centers of Am. v. 961 Credit Counseling Centers of Am. v. Credit Counseling Centers 961 Creek; Westhaven Village v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Croatian Roman Catholic Cong., Holy Trinity Church v. Wuerl . . 1114 Crockett, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978,1087 Croft v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Cronin, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961,1053 Cronin; Mitchell-Angel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Crosetto v. Wisconsin State Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Cross, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Cross v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904,1026,1153 Cross v. Murphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026,1153 Crossley v. Liberty Bank & Trust Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Crouch v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Crouse v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801 Crowder v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885,1024 Crowder; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087 Cruz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Cruz-Fernandez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Crystal Evangelical Free Church; Christians v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Csoka v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Adams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 CSX Transportation, Inc.; Adams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 CSX Transportation, Inc.; Basinger v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 CSX Transportation, Inc.; Cochran v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Cuch v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Cudjo v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Culp v. Hood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Culver City; Ehrlich v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Cumberland Farms, Inc.; Adams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Cumming; Nationalist Movement v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xlii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Cunningham, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003 Cunningham; Aaron v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031,1143 Cunningham; Hardin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930,1035 Cupidon v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Curd v. Searcy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Curiale v. Knowles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Curiale v. Lowery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Curry; WSB Electric, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Curtis; Rosado v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Curtis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Cutler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Cyprus Minerals Co.; Anchondo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 D. v. District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Dahl v. Charles Schwab & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Dahler v. Meyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Dailey v. LTV Aerospace & Defense Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Daily News of Los Angeles v. National Labor Relations Bd. . . . . 1090 Dairy Queen; Sawyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Dais v. Mazurkiewicz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Dalal v. Kaiser Permanente . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Daley; Erwin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Daley v. Ferguson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Dalis v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Dalkon Shield Claimants Trust; Bergstrom v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Dalkon Shield Claimants Trust; Gill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Dallas County; Foreman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 957,1147 Dallas Cowboys Football Club; Poissenot v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Dalton; Becerra v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Dalton; Greenlaw v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Dalton; Hy Thi Nguyen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045,1143 Dalton; Sayco Ltd. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Dalton; Steward v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Dalton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 D'Ambrosio, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990,1074 Damico v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Dammer v. Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Dan Chase Taxidermy Supply Co. v. Superior Form Builders, Inc. 809 Daniel; Ratcliff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Daniels v. Burke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Daniels v. Lassalle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Daniels v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896,1094,1156 Danik, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980,1144 Darby v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034,1143 Dare County Bd. of Ed.; Sakaria v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976,1071 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xliii Page Darien; Villager Pond, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Daugherty v. Sarasota County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Davage v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Davenport v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 David v. Apfel, Levy, Zlotnick & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 David v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Davidson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Davis v. Freeman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Davis v. Goord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Davis v. Hanover Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056,1143 Davis; Kirby v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880,1049 Davis v. Leonardo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Davis v. O'Brien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041,1143 Davis v. Sacramento County District Attorney's Office . . . . . . . . 996 Davis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012,1034,1069,1099,1100 Davis v. Wonderland Greyhound Park, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Davison, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1104 Davon, Inc. v. Shalala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Dawn v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Dawson v. Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Day v. Committee of Bar Examiners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Day v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Dayhoff, Inc.; H. J. Heinz Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Dayse v. Department of Veterans Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Dayton; Tinch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Dayton Hudson Department Store Co. v. NLRB . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 DCX, Inc. v. Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Deaconess Hospital, Inc.; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Dean v. Senkowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Dean v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 DeAnnuntis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. Harrison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Deas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Deases v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 DeBardeleben v. Hawk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 De Buono v. NYSA­ILA Medical and Clinical Services Fund . 926,1088 DeCastro v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 DeCastro v. Pataki Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Deckard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 De. D. v. District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Dee v. Reno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873,1001 Dees v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 DeJesus v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 DeJesus v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xliv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page de la Cruz v. New York City Human Resources Administration 805 de la Mora v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Delaware; Anderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Delaware; Dawson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Delaware; Ferguson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Delaware; Price v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Delaware; Sullivan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Delaware; Weeks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Delaware County Bd. of Supervisors; MacDonald v. . . . . . . . . . . 872 Delaware River Port Authority; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Delespine, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Delia v. Itochu International, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Dellenbach v. Hanks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Delmarle v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Del Mundo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Delsante; Fischer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Delta Air Lines, Inc.; Hudson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Delta Dental Plan of Cal., Inc.; SmileCare Dental Group v. . . . . . 1028 DeLuca; Lord v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Demarey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1023 Demeo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Demint v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Demonick v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Dempsey v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892,1024 Denbicare U. S. A., Inc. v. Toys "R" Us, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Denetclaw v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Denha v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Denk; Dunn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Dennis; Higgins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Dennis; Maryland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Denogean v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 DeNoyer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Dent v. Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Denton County Sheriff; Phelps v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878,1023 Denver v. Carpenter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Denver; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010,1101 Department of Agriculture; Cal-Almond, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Department of Agriculture; Produce Place v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Department of Air Force; Hill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Department of Air Force; McCabe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Department of Army; Berkley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997,1072 Department of Army; McQuown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Department of Defense; Garrett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Department of Defense; Nguyen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848,1023 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xlv Page Department of Ed.; Goranowski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Department of Ed.; Tucker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Department of Health and Human Services; Singla v. . . . . . . . 970,1072 Department of Human Services, Franklin County; Billman v. . . . 1041 Department of Interior; McMillan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Department of Interior v. South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 919 Department of Justice; Armendariz-Mata v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Department of Justice; Bulgier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Department of Justice; Garrison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Department of Justice; Lawyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1088 Department of Labor; Conlan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Department of Labor; Florida Dept. of Labor and Emp. Sec. v. . . 1109 Department of Labor; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Department of Navy; Beagles v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Department of Revenue of Fla. v. Share International, Inc. . . . . . 1056 Department of Social Services of Mich.; Lemons v. . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Department of State v. Legal Assistance for Vietnamese Asylum Seekers, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,804,1106 Department of Transportation of Alaska; Ehrlander v. . . . . . . . . 1011 Department of Treasury; Toepeaka v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Department of Veterans Affairs; Dayse v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Department of Veterans Affairs; Minnifield v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Department of Veterans Affairs; Nawachie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Depenbrock v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 DePiano v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Depository Trust Co.; Toro v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Deramus v. Jackson National Life Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 DeRewal v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Derr v. Jabe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Derstein; Perkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 DeSarno v. Allegheny County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Desnick v. Illinois Dept. of Professional Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . 965 DeTella; Hockenberry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 DeTella; Snipes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Deutch; Minnich v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Devlin v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Dexter Township; Boltach v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Diaz v. Duckworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Diaz v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Diaz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909,1078 DiCesare v. Stuart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Dick v. Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Dickenson; Kilo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Dickerson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xlvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Dickeson v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Dickey v. McMahan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 DiDomenico v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Dienstberger v. General Motors Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Dietsch v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Diggs v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Digital Equipment Corp.; Harrison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Di Lauro v. Ver Strate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Dillard v. Security Pacific Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Dillard Department Stores, Inc. v. Harold's Stores, Inc. . . . . . . . . 928 Dillingham v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Dillingham Constr., N. A.; California Div. of Labor Stds. Enf. v. . 316 Dinkins v. Hutzel Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Dinwiddie v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Director, OWCP; Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248,924 Director, OWCP; Lisa Lee Mines (Terrilynne Coal Co.) v. . . . . . . 1090 Director, OWCP; Parker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Director of penal or correctional institution. See name or title of director. Disciplinary Bd. of Ala. State Bar; Asam v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814,1001 Disney Stores, Inc.; McNemar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 District Court. See U. S. District Court. District Court of Appeal of Fla., Third Dist.; Swain v. . . . . . . . . . 851 District Judge. See U. S. District Judge. District of Columbia; Ayeboua v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880,1024 District of Columbia; De. D. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 District of Columbia; Patterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 District of Columbia; Savage v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902,988 District of Columbia Bar Assn.; Pels v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 District of Columbia Bd. on Pro. Responsibility; Cornish v. . . . 869,1023 District of Columbia Court of Appeals; Stanton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Dept.; Hope v. . . . . . . . 853 Divetta v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Dix v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Dixon v. Dixon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Dixon v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Dixon v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Dixon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Doan v. Seagate Technology, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Dobson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Doc's Food Stores, Inc.; Schwartz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Doctor's Associates, Inc.; Weible v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Doctors Hospital Mgmt. Co., Tax Matters Partner v. Commissioner 811 Dodaro v. Christy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xlvii Page Dodson v. Hillcrest Securities Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Doe v. Grievance Adm'r, Mich. Attorney Grievance Comm'n . . . . 946 Doe v. Lockwood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Doe; Lowe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Doe v. Lungren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947,976 Doe; Lungren v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947,976 Doe v. Purity Supreme, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Doe; Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425,804,947 Doe; Siegel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830,1024 Doe v. Southeastern Pa. Transportation Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Doe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Dolfi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Dolihite v. King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Domingues v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Dominguez-Alvarado v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Domino v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Donato; Plainview-Old Bethpage Central School Dist. v. . . . . . . . 1150 Donnelley & Sons Co. v. Fuchs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Donnellon, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 Donovan; Arkansas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Donovan; Arkansas Term Limits v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958,1149 Donovan; Priest v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958 Donovan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Dooley v. International Safety Instruments, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Dooling v. Circuit Court of Ill., Rock Island County . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Doran v. McGinnis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Dormire; Vaughan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Dorrough v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Dorsett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Dorsey; Cotton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Dorsey; Earnest v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Dorsey; Hubbard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Dorsey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Dortch; Anderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814,1143 Dortch v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Dortch v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Dortch v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Dorval v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Dotson v. California Public Utilities Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Dotson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Douglas v. Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Douglas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Dover; Windley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Dover Township Rent Leveling Bd.; Galaxy Manor v. . . . . . . . . . 911 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR xlviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Dover Township Rent Leveling Bd.; Rivkin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Dow Corning Corp.; Breast Implant Tort Claimants Represented by O'Quinn, Kerensky, McAninch & Laminack v. . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 Dow Corning Corp.; Official Committee of Tort Claimants v. . . . . 1071 Dowden; Constellation Development Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Dowell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Dowling v. Atlanta City School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Downey; Quintanilla v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Downhour v. Somani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Downs v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Doyle v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Doyle v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 Draghi v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Drennon v. Rodriguez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Driscoll; Bowersox v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Drobny v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Drug Enforcement Administration; Olsen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Drummond v. West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 D'Souza v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Duarte v. U. S. Bureau of Prisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Dubin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872,1102 Du Bois, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946,1145 Dubois v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 DuBuc v. Court of Criminal Appeals of Okla. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Duchene v. Plunkett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Duckett v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Duckworth; Diaz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Duckworth; Glass v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Dudleson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Duff v. Governor of Ill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962,1111 Dugger; Ali v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Dumbrique v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Dunbar v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Duncan Aircraft Sales of Fla., Inc. v. Cappello . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Duncil; Azeez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Duncil; Ferguson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Dunlap v. Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Dunlap v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Dunmeyer v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Dunn v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465,925 Dunn v. Denk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Dunworth v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Duplessis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Du Pont de Nemours & Co.; Schuver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xlix Page Dupree v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1103 Duque v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819,893 Durham v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Durkin v. Major League Baseball . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Dusenbery v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Dutcher v. Moreo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Dutton v. O'Guinn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Dutton; O'Guinn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Dworzanski v. Dworzanski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878,1085 Dyce v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Eads v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Early v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Earnest v. Dorsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Eastland v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 East Palo Alto v. Hazzard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Ebb v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Ebbert, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978,1145 Ebenhart v. Cohen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 ECC International Corp.; Rehman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923,993,1029 Edgar; Schueller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Edgar v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Edgars; Swoyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Edgewater Sun Spot, Inc. v. Pennington & Haben, P. A. . . . . . . . 931 Edgewood Baptist Church v. Cesnik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Edgin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Edmond v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977,1027 Edmonds v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Edmondson; Rodriguez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Edwards v. Kernan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Edwards v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Edwards v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Edward Valves, Inc.; Wake County v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Egbert v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Eguita v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Ehredt Underground, Inc. v. Commonwealth Edison Co. . . . . . . . 1056 Ehrlander v. Department of Transportation of Alaska . . . . . . . . . 1011 Ehrlich v. Culver City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.; Schuver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 800 Reservation, Inc.; Holiday Inns, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Einhorn Yaffee Prescott Architecture & Engineering v. Turpin . 929 Ekwerekwu v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Elder v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Electrical Workers v. Houston Lighting & Power Co. . . . . . . . . . 809 Electronic Data Systems Corp.; Barbee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR l TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Electro-Voice, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Eliasen v. Itel Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965,1085 Elich v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Eline v. Frank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 El Jabaar v. Young . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Elkhart; Starzenski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028,1055 Ellerbee v. Cobb County School Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Ellerbee v. Mills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Elliott; Pargo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Elliott v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859,869,987,1118 Ellis, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1075 Ellis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909,1118 Ellison v. Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Ellisor v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 El Paso Community College; Hernandez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Elramly; Immigration and Naturalization Service v. . . . . . . . . . . 924 Eltayib v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 EMC Corp. v. Norand Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Emery v. Galose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Emery v. Toledo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Emmons v. Lumley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Employment Appeal Bd.; O'Brien v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Energy Transportation Corp. v. Garner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 England v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Englewood Associates; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Englewood Disposal Co.; Kienzel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Enoch v. Gramley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Enriquez v. Hatcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Enriquez-Varela v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Envirodyne Industries, Inc.; Ryckman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 EPA; Marine Shale Processors, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Envirotest Technologies, Inc.; Anderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 EEOC; Kentucky State Police Dept. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 EEOC v. Metropolitan Ed. Enterprises, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 EEOC; Sheet Metal Workers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945 Equils v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Erath County; Milligan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Erdmann; Bergmann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Erickson v. Gordon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Erickson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Erickson; Weber v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Eriksen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Ernst Home Center, Inc.; Glenbrook Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Ernst & Young LLP v. Knapp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED li Page Ertel v. Patriot-News Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Erwin v. Daley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Escobedo-Moreno v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Esparza v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Espericueta v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Espinosa-Sanchez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Esposito v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Esquire Magazine; McFarlane v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Esquivel v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Essrick, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961 Estate. See name of estate. Esteban Moreno v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Estrada Medrano v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053 Ethier v. Larson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Evans; Bayshore National Bank of La Porte v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Evans; Chicago v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Evans v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Evans; Frederick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Evans; Lennox v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Evans v. McBride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Evans; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Evans v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940,999,1020,1072 Evanston; Moses v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Evansville; Studio Art Theatre of Evansville, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . 866 Everard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Everett, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806,1001 Everett v. Board of Immigration Appeals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Evergreen v. Stallworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Everhart v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Everman v. Albertson's, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Ewain v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Eyerly; Mirin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Eyoum v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Ezeoke v. Pry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Ezeoke v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Fabianich v. Holmes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Fadness; Kuntz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Faircloth v. Lundy Packing Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Fairfax County Bd. of Supervisors; McWilliams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Fairfax-Falls Church Community Services Bd.; Olson v. . . . . . . . 1099 Fairleigh Dickinson Univ.; Healy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Fairway Foods, Inc. v. Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Falciso v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Fankell; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR lii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Fargo; Habiger v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Fargo; Veneklase v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Farley; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Farley; Stone v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Farm Credit Services of Central Ark.; Arkansas v. . . . . . . . . . 805,1085 Farmer; Messler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Farmers Ins. Exchange; United Farmers Agents Assn., Inc. v. . . 1116 Farmington; Archuleta v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Farnsworth v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 Farquhar v. Manhattan Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Farr v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Farrell, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Farris v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Faruqui v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825,1022 Fasken v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 Faulder v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Faulk v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Favarolo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 FCC; Advanced Communications Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 FCC v. Iowa Utilities Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978 FCC; Mobile Telecommunication Technologies Corp. v. . . . . . . . . 823 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Atherton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Coleman, Shaw, Willous Group, Inc. v. 1002 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Gimbel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Greene County Bank v. . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Hemmerle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828,1022 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Herring v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Hess v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Martinez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Sporting Club Acquisitions, Ltd. v. . . 810 Federal Deposit Ins. Corp.; Stattin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Federal Election Comm'n; Albanese v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Federal Election Comm'n; Republican National Committee v. . . . 1055 FERC; Amoco Energy Trading Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Federal Express Corp.; Rivers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 FHLMC; American Bankers Mortgage Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 FHLMC; Mortgage Network, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Federal Ins. Co.; House of Lloyd, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Feher v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Feinberg v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Feinstein v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Felder v. Stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897,1035 Feldmeyer; Barone v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Feliciano v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED liii Page Felker, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 989 Felker v. Turpin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 988,989 Fells v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Felton v. Agostini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Felton; Agostini v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086 Felton; Chancellor, Bd. of Ed. of New York City v. . . . . . . . . . . . 1086 Felton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Fenney v. Benson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Fent v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Fenton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Ferbar Corp. of Cal.; Bay Area Laundry Pens. Trust Fund v. . . . 991 Fergurson v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Ferguson; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1036 Ferguson; Daley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Ferguson v. Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Ferguson v. Duncil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Ferguson v. F. R. Winkler GMBH & Co. KG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Ferguson; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Fernandes v. Rockaway Township Town Council . . . . . . . . . . . 824,1001 Ferreria; Robert v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Fessler; Bland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Fetrow v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Fields v. American Express Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882,1001 Fields v. Battle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801 Fields; Bradley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Fields v. Hinkle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Fields v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Fierro; Gomez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 918 Figueroa v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 FileNet Corp.; Saathoff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 FilmTec Corp.; Hydranautics v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Finch v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Finfrock v. Jordan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Finizie v. Bridgeport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Fink v. Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Finneran v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Finney v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Finno v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Fiore, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1075 Firsdon v. Internal Revenue Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 First American Bank of Va.; Arena Sports, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 First Madison Bank, FSB; Simms v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041,1143 First Nat. Bank & Trust Co.; AT&T Family Fed. Credit Union v. 1148 First Nat. Bank & Trust Co.; National Credit Union Admin. v. . . 1148 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR liv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page First State Bank of Harvard; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 First Union National Bank of Fla.; Staup v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894,1024 Fischbach & Moore, Inc.; Anderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876,1023 Fischbach & Moore, Inc. v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. . . . . . . . . . 1056 Fischer v. Blackshear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Fischer v. Delsante . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Fischer v. United Capital Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125,1131 Fisher v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Fisher v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Fitch; Cheren v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Fitzgerald v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Fitzhugh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Flanagan v. Cazalet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Flatten v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Flattum v. Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Fleenor v. Hewitt Soap Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863,1035 Fleming v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047,1083 Fletcher; Kalina v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Fletcher v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857,1053,1133 Flores; Boerne v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1088 Flores; Gregory v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Flores v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Flores v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888,1088 Flores-Garcia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Florida; Archer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Florida; Bottoson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Florida; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Florida; Bush v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945 Florida; Card v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Florida; Dortch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Florida; Durham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Florida; Egbert v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Florida; Evans v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Florida; Garcia v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Florida; Geralds v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Florida; Greater Ministries International, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Florida; Harvey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Florida; Haynes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Florida; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825,1152 Florida; Larzelere v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Florida; Mills v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025 Florida; Ogden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Florida; Olsen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Florida; Orme v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lv Page Florida; Peterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096,1122 Florida; Pope v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Florida v. Soca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Florida; Venson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Florida; Wuornos v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968,997 Florida Dept. of Business and Professional Regulation; Corpora- cion de Exportaciones Mexicanas USA, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962 Florida Dept. of Community Affairs; Moorman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Florida Dept. of Labor and Emp. Sec. v. Department of Labor . . 1109 Florida Dept. of Revenue v. General Development Corp. . . . . . . . 824 Florida Dept. of State, Division of Licensing; Cancil v. . . . . . . . . 849 Florida Dept. of Veterans Affairs; Adams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Florida League of Professional Lobbyists, Inc. v. Meggs . . . . . . . 1010 Floris v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Flour Bluff Independent School Dist.; Katherine M. v. . . . . . . . . . 1111 Floyd; Harrison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Floyd v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Floyd v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Flucas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Flynn v. Kornwolf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Foley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Fontao v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Foote, Inc.; Vick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Foote Tire; Vick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Forbes v. Patrissi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Forbey v. New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Ford v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Ford v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999,1020 Ford v. Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Fordham v. Massachusetts Bar Counsel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Fordice; Lawson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Fordice; Young v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991,1027,1039 Ford Motor Co.; Coleman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1075 Foreman v. Dallas County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 957,1147 Forman v. IBEW Local Union No. 640 Pension Trust Fund . . . . . 1053 Forman; Korean Air Lines Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Forrest v. Vasquez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Fort v. Hailey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1102 Fort v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Fortescue v. Simpson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857,1023 Fortini v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Fort Worth; Reedom v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Foster v. Giant Food, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Foster v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR lvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Foster v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Foster v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Foster v. U. S. Marshals Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Foti v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Foundation Industries, Inc.; Service Employees v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Fountain v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Fountain; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Foutch v. Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Fowler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Fox v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 Franco; Green v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Frank; Eline v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Frank v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Franklin v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . 834 Franklin; Roberson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Franklin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Franklin National Bank of Washington; Geter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Franks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Franz, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Franz; Bierley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954,1036 Fraser v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Frazer; Gabor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1035 Frazier v. King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Frazier v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 Freddie Mac; American Bankers Mortgage Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Freddie Mac; Mortgage Network, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Fredeluces v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Frederick v. Evans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Frederick v. Groose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Frederick; Henton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Frederick v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Freeman; Davis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Freeman v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Freeman; Simpson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Freeman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Freeman; Wrenn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Freeman v. Young . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Freeman United Coal Mining Co. v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Freestone; Blessing v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979 Freitas; Tristar Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 French v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Frey v. Bank One, Indianapolis, N. A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Frey v. Board of Regents of Univ. of Wis. System . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Frias-Castro v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lvii Page Friedline v. N. H. Dept. of HHS, Office of Child Support . . . . . . . 811 Frieze, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004 Fritz v. Champion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Froeman v. Glendening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Froeman v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 F. R. Winkler GMBH & Co. KG; Ferguson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Fry v. UAL Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Frye v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Fuchs; R. R. Donnelley & Sons Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Fuji Bank, Ltd.; Lee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005,1094 Fujinaka v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Fukutomi v. United States Trustee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Fu Lin v. Goldsboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Fuller v. Board of Selectmen for Canton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849,1035 Fuller; Montana v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Fuller v. Police Dept. of Bossier City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Fully Informed Jury Assn. v. San Diego County . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Furlong; Graham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Furr; Lang v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Furr v. Seagate Technology, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Furrow v. Bisson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Furtick v. Shults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Futernick v. Caterino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Gabel v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Gabor v. Frazer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1035 Gadson v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884,1035 Gaines v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Galan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Galaxy Manor v. Dover Township Rent Leveling Bd. . . . . . . . . . . 911 Gallant; Plante v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Gallardo, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Gallego v. Service Lloyds Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Gallegos v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Galloway v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Galloway v. Roe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Galose; Emery v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Galowski v. Berge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Gammon; Briscoe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Gammon; Cooper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Gammon; Weekley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Gandara-Granillo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Gannett Pacific Corp.; Corr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Ganyo v. Seguin Independent School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Garavaglia; CenTra, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR lviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Garcia v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Garcia v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Garcia v. United States . . . . . . . . . 840,843,853,858,865,907,986,1068,1133 Garcia-Rivas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Gardner v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Gardner v. Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Gardner v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Garner; Energy Transportation Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Garner v. Pennington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Garner v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Garnett v. Sobol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Garrett v. Department of Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Garrett v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Garrett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Garrison v. Department of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Gartner v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Garwood, McKenna & McKenna, P. A.; Rehman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Garwood, McKenna, McKenna & Wolf; Rehman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Gary v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Gary v. Pension Fund, Int'l Union of Operating Engineers, #478 938 Garza v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825,1022 Garza v. Weekley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950,1048 Garza Cantu v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906,985 Gaston v. Stone Container Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Gate v. Runyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Gates; Hungerschafer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Gateward v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Gault v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Gaunce, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980,1072 Gauthier v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Gaydos, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59,1006,1089,1143 Gearinger; Arewa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Geary v. Levindale Hebrew Geriatric Center and Hospital . . . . . 805,982 Geffrard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Geils Band Employee Benefit Plan v. Smith Barney Shearson, Inc. 823 Geiser v. Mathew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 General Development Corp.; Florida Dept. of Revenue v. . . . . . . . 824 General Electric Co.; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 General Motors Corp.; Dienstberger v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 General Motors Corp. v. Linden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 General Motors Corp. v. Tracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278,962 General Motors Corp.; Wiley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 General Motors Corp., Electro-Motive Division; Watson v. . . . . . . 842 General Motors Fisher-Body Division; Cotten v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lix Page General Public Utilities Corp.; Aldrich v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 General Secretariat of Org. of American States v. United States 807 General Services Administration; Richards v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896,1024 Generes v. Morrell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Generic Pharmaceutical Industry Assn. v. Bracco Diagnostics Inc. 1101 Genetech, Inc.; Bio-Technology General Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Gentry v. United Parcel Service, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Geoghegan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 George v. Angelone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1103 George v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 George v. Pacific-CSC Work Furlough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 George County; Brooks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 George Meany Center for Labor Studies; McDonald v. . . . . . . . . . 1054 Georgia; Bevil v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Georgia; Claywell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Georgia; Greene v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Georgia; Griffin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Georgia; Jarrett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Georgia; Nance v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Georgia; Rivas Linares v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Georgia; Wellons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Georgia Bd. of Pardons and Paroles; Lonchar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 988,989 Georgia Dept. of Corrections; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Georgia State Bd. of Pardons and Paroles; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . 851 Georgoulis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Geralds v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Ger-Dan International Telecom, Inc.; Tassa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 German; Logan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Gerth v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Geschke, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861,1023 Geter v. Franklin National Bank of Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Gianfortuna v. Jabe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1001 Giant Food, Inc.; Foster v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Gibbons v. Higgins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Gibbons v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Gibbs v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068,1157 Gibson v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Gibson v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Gibson County; Lucre, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Giffler v. Abel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Gifford v. Maine Dept. of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Gilbert, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802,1037 Gilbert v. Homar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052 Gilbert v. Parker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:49] PGT*TCR lx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Gilbert v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 Giles v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842,1018 Gill, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946,1037 Gill v. Dalkon Shield Claimants Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Gill v. New York State Bd. of Law Examiners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Gill v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Gillen v. Boston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Gillette v. Tansy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Gilliam v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Gilliam v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070,1120 Gilliard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Gillis; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Gilmore; McIntyre v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Gimbel v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Gimmel, Weiman, Savitz & Kronthal, P. A.; Norris v. . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Ginberg v. Tauber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Giraldo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Girard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Giuliani v. Yourman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Givans v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Givings v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Glant v. Glant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Glasberg; Bast v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Glass v. Duckworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Glenbrook Co. v. Ernst Home Center, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Glendening; Froeman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Glendening; Strong v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Glendora v. Hubbard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Glendora v. Malone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932,1079 Glendora v. Walsh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Glenn; Tate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Glickman; Levitoff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Glickman; Western Radio Services Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Glock v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888,1044,1076 Gloucester City Zoning Bd.; Intervine Outdoor Advertising v. . . . 1090 Glover v. McGinnis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Glover Bottled Gas Corp.; Jaspan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Glucksberg; Washington v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027,1039,1075 Gnadt v. Castro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Goble, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978,1053 Godaire v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834,1017,1022 Godinez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Godoy; Hofman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Godshalk v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxi Page Goetzman v. Agribank, FCB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Goff; Mayrant v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Goffer v. West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052 Goggans v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Goins v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Goins v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Goldberg v. Metro Dade County Building and Zoning Dept. . . . . . 1098 Golden v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Golden v. Kelsey-Hayes Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Golden; Kelsey-Hayes Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Golden Gate Hotel Assn. v. San Francisco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Goldin; Kennedy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931,946 Goldsboro; Oriental Jade Restaurant v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Goldsboro; Tseng Fu Lin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Golia-Paladin v. North Carolina Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Golkin, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003 Gomez; Ali v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Gomez; Call v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Gomez v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Gomez v. Fierro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 918 Gomez; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Gomez; Kashannejad v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Gomez; Montue v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Gomez; Perkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Gomez; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938,969 Gomez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Gomez; Wells v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Gomez Hernandez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Gomric, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037,1146 Gonzaba v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Gonzaga v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Gonzales v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Gonzales; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804,962 Gonzales v. Wright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Gonzalez v. Hawley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Gonzalez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020,1083 Gonzalez Lopez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Gooden; Hill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Goodman; Lee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Goodman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.; Musick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.; Tumlin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Goord; Atkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Goord; Davis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Goord; Spaight v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Goranowski v. Department of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Gordon v. Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Gordon; Erickson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Gordon v. Peoria School Dist. 150 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 Goris; Nachreiner Boie Art Factory v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Goss v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Gossage v. Barbour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Goudy v. Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Gough v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Gould v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Gould v. Pellella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Goulding v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Government of Virgin Islands; Weatherwax v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Governor of Alaska; Curiale v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Governor of Ark.; Wainwright v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072 Governor of Cal.; Saif'Ullah v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Governor of Fla.; Kilo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Governor of Ga.; Chandler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1051 Governor of Ga.; Clarke v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Governor of Ill.; Duff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962,1111 Governor of Md.; Froeman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Governor of Md.; Strong v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Governor of Miss.; Lawson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Governor of Mo.; Tyler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833,876 Governor of N. Y.; Brooks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Governor of N. C.; Pope v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804 Governor of N. C.; Shaw v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804 Governor of N. D.; North Dakota Assn. of Retarded Citizens v. . . 993 Governor of Pa.; Martin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Governor of Pa.; Pievsky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Governor of Utah; Penman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Governor of Virgin Islands; Cheatham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971,1072 Governor of Wash.; Curiale v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Graber; Mehio v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Grable v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Grace; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Grady; Brancato v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Graham v. Furlong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Graham v. New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Graham v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Graham v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Graham v. Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Graham v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844,1136 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxiii Page Gramley; Bracy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1074,1106 Gramley; Enoch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Gramley; Stewart v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838,1022 Granada v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046,1069 Grandison v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027,1143 Grant; Iverson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976,1036 Grant v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Grantwood Village v. Missouri Pacific R. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Grasmick v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Grass v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Gravel v. Gregoire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Gravely v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Gray, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1157 Gray v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925,1157 Gray; Netherland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1301 Gray v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907,931,966,1058 Grayson v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Great American Ins. Cos.; Kissi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Greater Ministries International, Inc. v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Greater New Orleans Broadcasting Assn., Inc. v. United States 801 Great Western Bank v. Kapsimalis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Green v. Franco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Green v. Phoenix Institute for Research & Ed., Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Green v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Green v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878,954,955,974,1034 Greenawalt v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1102 Greenawalt v. Stewart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1102,1103 Greenberg v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Greene v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Greene v. Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867,1023 Greene v. Tucker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Greene v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Greene County Bank v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Greenlaw v. Dalton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Greenspan v. National Labor Relations Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Greenwood v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Greer v. Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Greer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Gregoire; Gravel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Gregory, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1146 Gregory v. Botzheim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Gregory v. Flores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Gregory; White v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Gregory C. v. Los Angeles County Dept. of Children's Services . . 1081 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Greif v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Greuling v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Grey v. Morris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Gribetz, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961 Gridley; Strickland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Grievance Adm'r, Mich. Attorney Grievance Comm'n; Doe v. . . . . 946 Griffin, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1089 Griffin v. Box . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Griffin; Coughlin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Griffin v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Griffin; Holmes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812,1022 Griffin; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971,1049 Griffin; McVicar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923 Griffin v. Medtronic, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1104 Griffin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Griffith v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Griffith v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Grimes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Grimmett v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 Grines, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946 Grismore v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Groose; Anderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Groose; Frederick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Groose; Hosna v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Groose; Moore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Gross; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Gross; Izadpanah v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Grossman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946 Grossman, P. A. v. SEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Grosz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Group Health Service of Okla., Inc.; Cannon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Grumman Technical Services, Inc. v. Ishee's Estate . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Grune v. Thoubboron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Grynberg v. Klein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 GTE Vantage Inc.; Illinois High School Assn. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Guangzhou Ocean Shipping Co.; Singleton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 G*UB*MK Constructors v. Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Gudmanson; Shelton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883,1072 Guerra v. Communications Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Guichard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Guilbeau v. W. W. Henry Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Guilette v. Maine Dept. of Human Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Guillory; Alston v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Gulati v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxv Page Gullett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Gulley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Gunn; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Gunnell v. Littlefield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842,1071 Gurs v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Gustafson v. Lake Angelus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Gutierrez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Gutierrez-Hernandez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Gutierrez-Munoz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Gutstein v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Guzman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906,1020 Guzman Rivera v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Gwong; Singletary v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1051,1142 H. v. K. M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Haas v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Haas v. Wyatt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Habben v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Haberbush v. Clark Oil Trading Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Habiger v. Fargo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Hadley v. North Arkansas Community Technical College . . . . . . . 1148 Hafley; Lohman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Hageman v. Leason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Hagood v. Sonoma County Water Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865,1001 Hailey; Fort v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1102 Hain v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Hairston v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Haley v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Haley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Halford; Chambers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Halford; Snow v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Hall v. American National Red Cross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Hall v. Benet-Melendez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Hall v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Hall v. Browning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Hall; Lee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Hall v. Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Hall; Mains v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Hall v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020,1069,1139,1151 Hallandale; Bell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Hallgrimson v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Hallmark Cards, Inc.; Barber v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Hallock, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053,1087 Hall & Phillips; Jerry M. Lewis Truck Parts & Equipment, Inc. v. 1109 Hall & Phillips; United States ex rel. Virani v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Halsey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Hameed v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Hamer; Movsesian v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Hamilton, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1146 Hamilton; Bono v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Hamilton; Maxie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Hamilton v. Schriro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Hamilton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994,1102 Hamilton; Vines v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Hamm v. Latessa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Hamm v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Hammons v. Presto Roofing Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Hampshire v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Hampton v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Hampton; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Hampton v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Hampton v. University of Md. at Baltimore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Hampton Tree Farms, Inc. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Hamtramck; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993,1112 Hanberry v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Han Chul Choi; Steele v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Hancock Electronics Corp. v. Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth. 929 Hand v. Stepanik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Hanks; Dellenbach v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Hanlon; Lewis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Hannaford Bros. Co. v. Ciampi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Hannah v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Hanover Ins. Co.; Davis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056,1143 Hansberger v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 913 Hansen, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105 Hanson v. Stepanik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Hanson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Hao Hoang Ho v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Harbor Tug & Barge Co. v. Papai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026,1038 Hardin v. Cunningham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930,1035 Hardy v. Louisiana Dept. of Social Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Hargett; Harmon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Hargett; Jordan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Hargett; McFadden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Hargett v. National Westminster Bank, USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Hargis v. Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Harkrider v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Harmon v. Hargett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Harney v. California State Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxvii Page Harold's Stores, Inc.; Dillard Department Stores, Inc. v. . . . . . . . 928 Harper v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045,1136 Harper v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858,1023 Harpster v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Harrell v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Harrell; Sunenblick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Harrell; Uptown Records v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Harri v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Harris v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Harris v. Coughlin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Harris v. Gillis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Harris v. Gomez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Harris v. Hamtramck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993,1112 Harris v. Port Huron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Harris v. Rector and Bd. of Visitors of Univ. of Va. . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Harris v. Roe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Harris v. San Diego County Dept. of Social Services . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Harris v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851,863,864,893,1068 Harris v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Harris Custom Builders, Inc. v. Hoffmeyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Harrison v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Harrison; Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Harrison v. Digital Equipment Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Harrison v. Floyd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Harrison v. Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Harrison v. Letsinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Harrison; Metropolitan Govt. of Nashville & Davidson County v. 863 Harrison v. Moya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Harrison; Simms v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Harrison v. Thompson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Harrison v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932,1000 Hart; Jefferson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Hart v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Hart/Cross v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Hartford; Ricketts v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Hartley Marine Corp. v. Paige . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Hartsel v. Keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Harvey, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Harvey; Bretzing v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Harvey v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Harvey v. Perrill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Harvey v. Shillinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Harvey v. Wisconsin Bd. of Attorneys Professional Responsibility 824 Harvin v. Stephens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Hasan v. U. S. Postal Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Hascall v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Hasenstab v. New York City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Hastings v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Hatch v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Hatcher, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990 Hatcher; Enriquez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Hatcher; Odoms v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Hatney v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Hatter; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801 Haudrich; Howmedica Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Hauert v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Haun v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Hawk; Contreras v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Hawk; DeBardeleben v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Hawkesworth; Blank v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Hawkins v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847,1016 Hawkins v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844,974,1156 Hawks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Hawley; Gonzalez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Hawley; Howard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Hayden Goodwill Inn School; Martins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Hayes v. Correction Management Affiliates, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . 881,1024 Hayes v. Rocha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Hayes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Haygood v. Savage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Hayling; Meadows v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Haynes v. Compton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Haynes v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Haynes v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Haynes v. Lemann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Haynes v. Patterson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952,1064 Haynes v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939,1102 Haynes v. Summerville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Hays; Louisiana Legislative Black Caucus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804,1049 Haywood v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Hazelett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Hazzard; East Palo Alto v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Heady v. Barclays Bank of N. Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Heady Electric Co. v. Barclays Bank of N. Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Healy v. Fairleigh Dickinson Univ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Heard v. Call . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Hebeka v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Hedden v. National Railroad Passenger Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxix Page Hedlund v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Hedrick v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Heiden v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Heil v. Lebow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Hein v. McNeil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Heinz Co. v. Dayhoff, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Heistand v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Heitman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Helbling v. Bevere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Heldon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Helland v. South Bend Community School Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Helman; Saleem v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Helton v. Kmart Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Helton; Kmart Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Helton v. Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Helwig; Kelsey-Hayes Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Hemmerle v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828,1022 Henao v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Henderson, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978,1074 Henderson v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Henderson v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Henderson v. Stewart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Hennessy v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Henry, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990,1104 Henry v. Sherman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Henry v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Henry Co.; Guilbeau v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Henson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Henton v. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Heon v. Vose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Herklotz; Basey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Herloski v. Kelly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Hermanson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Hernandez v. El Paso Community College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Hernandez v. Runyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Hernandez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826,860,867,876,893,902 Hernando Ramirez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Herrera v. New Mexico Dept. of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Herrera v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Herrera-Rivera v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Herring v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027 Herron v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Hershey v. California State Humane Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Hershey v. Santa Clara Valley Humane Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Hervey v. Shalala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Hervey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Hess v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Hess v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087 Hesse; Bush v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Hession; Simpson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Hester v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Hetzel v. Prince William County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Hewitt Soap Co.; Fleenor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863,1035 Hibbard; Loew v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Hickey; Sawyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Hickman v. Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Hickman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,901 Hicks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901,985 Higgins v. Dennis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Higgins; Gibbons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Highland Irrigation Co. v. Colorado ex rel. Simpson . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Hightower v. Vose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Hilbig; Cotton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860,1071 Hildebrand v. Love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Hill; Aldridge v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Hill v. City & State Factors, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969,1085 Hill v. Clifton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Hill v. Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Hill v. Department of Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Hill; Dunlap v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Hill v. Gooden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Hill; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1102 Hill v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Hill v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Hill v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Hill; Spaulding v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Hill v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810,853,858,981,1033 Hillcrest Healthcare Corp.; Wilkinson & Monaghan v. . . . . . . . . . 861 Hillcrest Securities Corp.; Dodson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Hinchliffe v. Transamerica Financial Consumer Discount Co. . . 818,1022 Hines v. ABB Vetco Gray, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Hines v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Hines v. Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Hines v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843,956 Hinh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Hinkle; Fields v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 H. J. Heinz Co. v. Dayhoff, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 H. M.; Special School Dist. No. 1 v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxi Page Ho v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Hoang v. Mercury Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Hoang Ho v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Hoare, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961 Hobbs v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Hockenberry v. DeTella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Hodges v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Hodrick v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Hoechst Celanese Corp.; BP Chemicals Ltd. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Hofbauer; Lonchar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Hofbauer; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Hoff v. Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Hoffmann v. Hoffmann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925,1027 Hoffmeyer; Harris Custom Builders, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Hofman v. Godoy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Hofmann v. Pressman Toy Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828,977 Hofstetter; Steward v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Hogan v. Butterworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Hogan v. Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Hogan v. McDaniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Hogan v. Wisconsin Dept. of Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Hoke v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Holden v. Briggs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Holden; Canadian Consulate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Holiday Inns, Inc. v. 800 Reservation, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Holiday West Mobile Home Park v. Caterino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Holland; Poole v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Holland v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964,1131 Hollar v. Myers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969,1085 Hollar v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Hollingsworth, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Holloway v. Jabe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Holman Warfield v. Warfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Holmberg v. Ramsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Holmes; Fabianich v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Holmes v. Griffin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812,1022 Holt v. J. L. Prescott Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Holt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857,866,906 Holtz v. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 Holtzclaw v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Holub v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Holy Cross Hospital; Lowe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Homar; Gilbert v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052 Homick v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Honn v. R. J. Steichen & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Honolulu; One World One Family Now v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Hood; Culp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Hood v. Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Hook, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 Hook v. McDade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 959 Hooper v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Hoover v. Suffolk Univ. Law School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Hoover v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052 Hope, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806,1071 Hope v. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Dept. . . . . . . . . 853 Hope; Lake v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Hopewell v. KELO-Land News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Hopewell v. Midcontinent Broadcasting Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Hopkins v. Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Hopkins; Nesbitt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Hopkins; Reeves v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Hopkins; Victor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Hopper v. Anton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Hopper; Waldrop v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Horn; Cheek v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Horner; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Horodner v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Horton v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Horton v. Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Horton v. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Hoskins v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891,907 Hosna v. Groose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Houghteling v. Houghteling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Houghteling v. Hutchinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Houlihan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 House of Lloyd, Inc. v. Federal Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Houston Lighting & Power Co.; Electrical Workers v. . . . . . . . . . 809 Houston Lighting & Power Co.; Reece v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Houston Oilers, Inc.; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Hoversten v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Howard v. Chapel Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822,1022 Howard v. Hawley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Howard v. Potter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Howard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836,851,901,980 Howard v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Howard Univ.; Park v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Howell v. Booker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Howell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxiii Page Howmedica Inc. v. Haudrich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Hoxworth; Blinder v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Hoy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Hoyett, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Hoyett v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Hsu; Roslyn Union Free School Dist. No. 3 v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Hubbard v. Dorsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Hubbard; Glendora v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Huckabee; Wainwright v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072 Hudson v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Hudson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Huff v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Huffman v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Huffman; Pugh v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Hughes, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003 Hughes v. Ignacio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Hughes v. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Hughes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082,1151 Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel. Schumer . . . . . . . 926,1088 Hughey v. JMS Development Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Humana Hospital-Tacoma v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Human Services Plaza Partnership v. Huntington National Bank 931 Humphrey v. Potlatch Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Humphreys v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Hundley; Ragland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Hungerschafer v. Gates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Hunt v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Hunt v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Hunt; Pope v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804 Hunt; Shaw v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804 Hunter v. Knoll Rig & Equipment Mfg. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Hunter v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939,985,1093 Huntington National Bank; Human Services Plaza Partnership v. 931 Huntley v. Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Huntsville; Ashley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Hupp v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Huss v. Acevedo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Hussein v. Raban Supply Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951,1072 Husske v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Huston v. Tennessee Bd. of Regents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Hutchinson; Houghteling v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Hutchinson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 Hutzel Hospital; Dinkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Hyde v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Hyde; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086,1106 Hydramatic Packing Co.; Sea Gull Lighting, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Hydranautics v. FilmTec Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Hyland Hill North Condo. Assn. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. . . 1041 Hy Thi Nguyen v. Dalton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045,1143 Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Hyung Su Lee v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Ibanez-Farias v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 IBEW Local Union No. 640 & Ariz. Ch. NECA Pens. Tr. Fd.; Forman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053 IBP, Inc.; Tovar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Ibrahim v. Roach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Idaho; Roberts v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Idaho Petroleum Clean Water Trust Fund; V­1 Oil Co. v. . . . . . . 1009 Ieyoub v. CIGNA Healthplan of La., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Ieyoub; McGee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Ieyoub; Ross v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Igbonwa v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Ignacio; Hughes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Ignacio; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Iguade v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Iguwa v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Illinois; Aleman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Illinois; Antonelli v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Illinois; Ashford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Illinois; Bounds v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Illinois; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881,970 Illinois; Bryant v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Illinois; Cole v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Illinois; Coleman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Illinois; Dortch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Illinois; Fergurson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Illinois; Foster v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Illinois; Henderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Illinois; Hooper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Illinois; Janes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Illinois; Jenkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Illinois; Keene v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Illinois; Lawrence v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Illinois; Maciel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Illinois; Matthews v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Illinois; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Illinois; Moore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Illinois; Munson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxv Page Illinois; Oaks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Illinois; Parisi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Illinois; Redd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Illinois; Rodriguez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Illinois; Rupert v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Illinois; Sanchez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Illinois; Shern v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Illinois; Simpson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Illinois; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Illinois; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Illinois; Wages v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Illinois; Whitehead v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Illinois v. Yarber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Illinois Bd. of Elections; King v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978 Illinois Dept. of Professional Regulation; Desnick v. . . . . . . . . . . 965 Illinois High School Assn. v. GTE Vantage Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Illinois Property Tax Appeal Bd.; Cotter & Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Immediato v. Rye Neck School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Campos Perez v. . . . . . . 1081 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Cupidon v. . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Elramly . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Franklin v. . . . . . . . . . . 834 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Iguwa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Kharrat v. . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Mendez-Rosas v. . . . . . . 1061 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Owusu v. . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Qasguargis v. . . . . . . . . 1148 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Reyes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Samuel v. . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Scheidemann v. . . . . . . . 803 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Sule v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Immigration and Naturalization Service; Yang v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Yueh-Shaio Yang . . . 26,1085 Impola v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Indelicato v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Independence Savings Bank; Sam v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Independent Charities of America, Inc. v. Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 993 Independent Order of Foresters; Baker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Independent School Dist. No. 33 of Creek County; Redding v. . . . 949 Indiana; Blackmon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Indiana; Bowyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Indiana v. Bryant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926 Indiana; Harrison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Indiana; Isaacs v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Indiana; Sceifers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Indiana Comm'n on Judicial Qualifications; McClain v. . . . . . . . . . 1027 Indianapolis; Tinsley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 Indu Craft, Inc. v. Bank of Baroda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Induisi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Industrial Comm'n of Ariz.; Camilli v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Industrial Comm'n of Ill.; Jarabe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc. v. Director, OWCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248,924 Ingebretsen; Moore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Ingraham; McGee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Inland Container Corp.; McDonald v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895,1049 In re. See name of party. Insty*Bit, Inc.; Poly-Tech Industries, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Intercargo Ins. Co. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Inter-Modal Rail Employees Assn. v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. 1003,1089 Internal Revenue Service; Firsdon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Internal Revenue Service; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Internal Revenue Service; Kallevig v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Internal Revenue Service; MacKenzie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Internal Revenue Service; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1049 International. For labor union, see name of trade. International Cablevision, Inc.; Noel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 International Safety Instruments, Inc.; Dooley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Interoceanica Corp. v. Ball . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Intervine Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Gloucester City Zoning Bd. 1090 Investek Financial Corp.; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Iowa; Amerson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Iowa; Cheshire v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Iowa; LaBayre v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Iowa; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Iowa Bd. of Regents and Univ. of Iowa; Brine v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Iowa Utilities Bd.; Association for Telecommunications Servs. v. 978 Iowa Utilities Bd.; Federal Communications Comm'n v. . . . . . . . . 978 Ipswich Police Dept.; Plante v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Iqbal v. Berkeley Marina Marriott Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Ireland v. Lowe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Irizarry-Sanabria v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Irvin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Irvin; Vigilante v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Irving v. College Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Irving v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Irving v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Irwin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Isaacs v. Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxvii Page Isern; Watson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Ishee's Estate; Grumman Technical Services, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . 864 Ishikawa v. New York City Dept. of Cultural Affairs . . . . . . . . . . 883 Island v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Israel-Treiber v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Itel Corp.; Eliasen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965,1085 Itochu International, Inc.; Delia v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 I. T. O. Corp. of Va.; Pettus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Iverson v. Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976,1036 Ivy v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Ivy v. Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Ivy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Izadpanah v. Gross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 J.; M. L. B. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Jaakkola v. Ashland County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Jabe; Covertino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Jabe; Derr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Jabe; Gianfortuna v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1001 Jabe; Holloway v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Jabe; Marbury v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Jabe; Sadler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Jackson v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Jackson v. Atlanta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Jackson v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Jackson v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930,985,1085 Jackson v. Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Jackson v. Internal Revenue Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Jackson v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Jackson v. Kessler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839,1022 Jackson v. Maine Dept. of Human Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Jackson; McIntosh v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Jackson v. Peugh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Jackson v. Sowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1143 Jackson v. Tamminga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Jackson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827,986,1018,1070,1134 Jackson National Life Ins. Co.; Deramus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Jackson Stone Co.; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Jacob v. AT&T Corporate Headquarters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Jacobs, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004,1145 Jacobs; Moore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Jacobs v. Supreme Court of Ill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Jaffer, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Jaime Avena v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Jamal v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Jamell v. Chesapeake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 James v. Ryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 James v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 James Madison Ltd. v. Ludwig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 James R.; Cindy R. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 James Square Nursing Home, Inc.; Wing v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Janes v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 January v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Japan Travel Bureau International, Inc.; Baba v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Jaques, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 Jarabe v. Industrial Comm'n of Ill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Jaramillo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Jarrell; Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Jarrett v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 JA­RU v. New York City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Jaspan v. Glover Bottled Gas Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Jasper v. Jasper Civil Service Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Jasper Civil Service Bd.; Jasper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Javier Romero, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 J. B. Grossman, P. A. v. SEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 JBL Consumer Products, Inc.; Kotam Electronics, Inc. v. . . . . . . 1110 J. C. Penny Co.; Nelson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Jefferson v. Hart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Jefferson v. Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Jefferson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853,1019 Jefferson County v. Acker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office; Pizzo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014,1102 Jeffries v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935,1035 Jelinek v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Jellico; Pilot Air Freight Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Jellico Studio of Western Art; Pilot Air Freight Corp. v. . . . . . . . 871 Jemzura v. New York State Electric & Gas Corp. . . . . . . . . . . 953,1036 Jenkin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Jenkins v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Jenkins v. National Labor Relations Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Jenkins v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Jenner v. Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Jennings v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Jennings v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Jenny Craig Weight Loss Centres, Inc.; Kisala v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Jensen v. California Bd. of Psychology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Jensen v. Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Jensen v. Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Jensen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxix Page Jeong; Conkle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Jeong Kyo Lim v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Jerry M. Lewis Truck Parts & Equipment, Inc. v. Hall & Phillips 1109 Jessep v. Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Jessop v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 J. Geils Band Employee Benefit Plan v. Smith Barney Shearson 823 Jhaveri v. Muro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Jin v. Temple Univ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013,1102 J. L. Prescott Co.; Holt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 J. M. Martinac & Co.; Saratoga Fishing Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1027 JMS Development Corp.; Hughey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Jo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Jobin; McKay v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 John Labatt Ltd. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 John O. Butler Co.; Ortiz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Johnson, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039,1143 Johnson; Abrams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925,947,1038 Johnson; Anderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814,1143 Johnson; Blackiston v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Johnson; Borcsik v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Johnson; Bowman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854,881 Johnson; Boyle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Johnson; Bray v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Johnson; Brookins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Johnson v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967,1049 Johnson; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Johnson; Callins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Johnson; Carey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Johnson; Clay v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877,1001 Johnson; Dunbar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Johnson; Estrada Medrano v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053 Johnson v. Fankell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Johnson; Faulder v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Johnson; Freeman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Johnson; George v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Johnson; Godaire v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834,1017,1022 Johnson; Golden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Johnson v. Griffin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971,1049 Johnson; Griffith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Johnson; Grismore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Johnson; Harrell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Johnson; Harri v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Johnson v. Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1102 Johnson; Hoyett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Johnson; Hunt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Johnson; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Johnson; Joseph v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Johnson v. Justices of Supreme Court of Cal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Johnson; Kemer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Johnson; King v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 Johnson; Lackey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Johnson; Laster v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Johnson; Lewis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849,1096 Johnson; Life Ins. Co. of Ga. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923 Johnson; Mallard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Johnson v. McCaughtry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 Johnson; McGhee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Johnson v. Merit Systems Protection Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Johnson; Mitchell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836,1022,1032,1143 Johnson; Montez Garcia v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Johnson v. National Assn. of Securities Dealers, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . 892 Johnson v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Johnson v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Johnson; Powell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Johnson; Reese v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Johnson v. Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Johnson v. Robbinsdale Independent School Dist. 281 . . . . . . . . . 1045 Johnson; Robinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935,1035 Johnson; Rogers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Johnson; Rose v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Johnson v. Rosemeyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Johnson; Sawyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836,837 Johnson v. Sheahan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Johnson v. Shillinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936,1036 Johnson; Short v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Johnson v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Johnson; Small v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Johnson; Smallwood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Johnson v. Snyder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Johnson v. Sparkman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Johnson; Spence v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Johnson v. Sullivan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Johnson; Teel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Johnson; Thompson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067,1080 Johnson; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Johnson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889, 948,989,1000,1017,1035,1046,1048,1083,1130,1140 Johnson; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925,947,1038 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxxi Page Johnson v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1072 Johnson v. Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Johnson; Wells v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Johnson; Wesley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1085 Johnson; Westley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Johnson; White v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911,1065 Johnson; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Johnson; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Johnson; Woods v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854,996 Johnson v. Zschach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Johnston v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Breeden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148,1149 Jones v. Associated Univs., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Jones v. Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Jones v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850,1035 Jones; Clinton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925 Jones; Coan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1023 Jones v. Farley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Jones v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825,1152 Jones; Freeman United Coal Mining Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Jones v. General Electric Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Jones; Haynes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Jones; Hill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Jones v. Ignacio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Jones; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Jones v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Jones; King v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Jones v. Klein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Jones v. Maryvale Samaritan Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Jones v. McGinnis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Jones; Montanez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Jones v. Nance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Jones v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Jones v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Jones v. Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Jones v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Jones; Pope v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Jones v. Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Jones; Seddens v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1048 Jones v. Superior Court of Cal., Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Jones v. Texas Commerce Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Jones v. United States . 849,850,941,943,948,956,973,1022,1068,1121,1156 Jones v. Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Jones; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Jones; Young v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Jones; Yurtis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1023 Jones, Waldo, Holbrook & McDonough; Bennett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Joost v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Jordan; Finfrock v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Jordan v. Hargett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Jordan v. Kenton County Bd. of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Jordan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Jordan v. Valdez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Jose; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Joseph v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Joseph v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Joyner v. Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Juarez Godinez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Juarez-Moreno v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Judge, Circuit Court of Fla., Indian River County; Waterfield v. 837 Judge, Circuit Court of Fla., Orange County; Strickland v. . . . . . 830 Judge, Circuit Court of W. Va., Wayne County; Peck v. . . . . . . . . 1121 Judge, District Court of Appeal of Fla., Fourth Dist.; Messler v. 912 Judge, District Court of Okla., Cleveland County; Turner v. . . . . 1123 Judge, District Court of Tex., Tarrant County; Tobias v. . . . . . . . 952 Judge, 19th Judicial District Court, East Baton Rouge; Daniels v. 1117 Judge, Supreme Court of N. Y., 9th Judicial Dist.; Lazich v. . . . . . 835 Judge, 295th Judicial District Court, Harris County; Burton v. . . 1043 Judge, Vigo County Court v. Indiana Comm'n, Jud. Qualifications 1027 Juri v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Jusino v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1048 Justices of Supreme Court of Cal.; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Juvenile (JJAC) v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Juvenile Male v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Kaczynski v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Kaepa, Inc.; Achilles Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Kagaku Co.; Roboserve, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Kahn v. Beicker Engineering, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965,1071 Kahre-Richardes Family Foundation, Inc. v. Baldwinsville . . . . . . 869 Kaiser Permanente; Dalal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Kalasho v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Kalina v. Fletcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Kallevig v. Internal Revenue Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Kalp v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Kalwaytis; Preferred Meal Systems, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Kalyan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Kambitsis v. Schwegmann Giant Supermarkets, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . 907 Kammefa v. Maryland Dept. of Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908,1036 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxxiii Page Kandies v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Kane; Greer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Kansas v. Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Kansas; Jensen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Kansas; Kinnell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Kansas; Schlicher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Kansas; Simpson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Kansas; Webber v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Kansas; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Kansas Pipeline Partnership; Citizens' Utility Ratepayer Bd. v. 1115 Kansas Pipeline Partnership; Williams Natural Gas Co. v. . . . . . . 1092 Kansas Public Employees Ret. System v. Reimer & Koger Assoc. 948 Kapadia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 Kapila; Ballard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Kapsimalis; Great Western Bank v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Karim-Panahi v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083,1131,1157 Kashannejad v. Gomez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Kashannejad v. Pickett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Katherine M. v. Flour Bluff Independent School Dist. . . . . . . . . . 1111 Kato Kagaku Co.; Roboserve, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Kauble v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Kauble v. Union Employee Discretionary Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Kaufman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1104 Kaufman v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Kauger; Skrzypczak v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Kay v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Kaye v. Coleman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 Kayne v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Kayser-Roth Corp. v. Sara Lee Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 K. D. H. v. K. M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Keane; Rivera v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Keane; Romer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Keane; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Keane; Vargas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Keathley, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004,1104 Keck; Willbanks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Keel v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Keem v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Keene v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Keesee v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Kelley v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Kelly; Ames v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Kelly v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Kelly; Herloski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Kelly; Murphy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Kelly v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067,1068,1100 Kelly Foods Corp. v. Martha White Foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Kelly Foods Corp. v. Windmill Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 KELO-Land News; Hopewell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Kelsey-Hayes Co. v. Golden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Kelsey-Hayes Co.; Golden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Kelsey-Hayes Co. v. Helwig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Kemer v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Kemna; Creasey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Kemp v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Kemp v. Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Kemp; Marshall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Kemp v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018,1076 Kendricks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Kennedy, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Kennedy v. Goldin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931,946 Kennedy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Kennett Square; Lal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Kenney v. Stark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Kenney v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Kent; McQuade v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Kenton County Bd. of Ed.; Jordan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Kentucky; Gardner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Kentucky; Hood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Kentucky; Perdue v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Kentucky; Slone v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Kentucky Bar Assn.; Waller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Kentucky State Police Dept. v. EEOC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Keohane; Rendelman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Kercher; Swoyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Kernan; Barker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Kernan; Edwards v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Kernan; Sutton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Kessell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Kessler; Bracco Diagnostics Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Kessler; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839,1022 Kessler v. Organon, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Kessler; Organon, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Ketchum v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Kevorkian v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Key v. Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839,1001 Key v. Oakland Housing Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Keycorp Mortgage, Inc.; Shimp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxxv Page Keys; Hartsel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Key West; Sciarrino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 KGET­TV Channel 17 v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 KGET­TV Channel 17 v. Superior Court of Cal., Kern County . . 1008 Khalil v. Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Khamvongsa v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Khan v. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Khan; State Oil Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Kharrat v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 KHD Deutz of America Corp. v. Stewart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Kidd v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Kiel v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Kienzle v. Englewood Disposal Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Kilaab al Ghashiyah (Khan) v. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Kiley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Killingsworth v. Stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Kilo v. Chiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Kilo v. Dickenson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Kimble v. Montgomery County Police Dept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Kimble v. Rehnquist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035 Kime v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Kim E. Laube Co. v. Sunbeam Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Kimes, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924,1053 Kinard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Kincheloe; Contreras v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 King, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 King v. American Civil Liberties Union of Miss., Inc. . . . . . . . . . 992 King; Dolihite v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 King; Frazier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 King v. Illinois Bd. of Elections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978 King v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 King v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 King v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 King; Modderno v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 King v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877,886,896,907 King County; McDonald v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Kinnell v. Convenient Loan Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838,987 Kinnell v. Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Kinney v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Kinser v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Kinsey v. Clenney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Kirby v. Davis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880,1049 Kirchgessner v. Wilentz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Kirkland v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Kirkland; Schaffer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982,1049 Kirkpatrick v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Kisala v. Jenny Craig Weight Loss Centres, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Kissi v. Great American Ins. Cos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Kissick v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Klade v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Klady v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Klais v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Klayman & Associates, P. C. v. Baldwin Hardware Corp. . . . . . . . 949 Klecan v. New Mexico Right to Choose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 959 Klehr v. A. O. Smith Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1073 Klein; Arkoma Production Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Klein v. Collard & Roe, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Klein; Grynberg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Klein; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Klein v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Klevenhagen; Babineaux v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Klinger v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Klopp v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839,1022 K. M.; K. D. H. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Kmart Corp. v. Helton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Kmart Corp.; Helton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Knapp; Ernst & Young LLP v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Knapp v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Knaub v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Knee Deep Cattle Co.; Bindana Investments Co. Ltd. v. . . . . . . . 1144 Kneeland v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Knight v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821,827,894 Knighton v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Knoll Rig & Equipment Mfg. Co.; Hunter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Knowles; Curiale v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Koch; Tesciuba v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952,1049 Koch Fuels, Inc. v. Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Kochvi v. New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Kokoska v. Bullen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Kokoski v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Kontakis v. Morton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898,1001 Korean Air Lines Co. v. Bickel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Korean Air Lines Co. v. Forman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Korean Air Lines Co.; Saavedra v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Kornwolf; Flynn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Ko Sai-Man v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Kosisky v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Koss v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxxvii Page Kotam Electronics, Inc. v. JBL Consumer Products, Inc. . . . . . . . 1110 Koven v. Pacific-Major Construction Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Koynok v. Koynok's Estate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Koynok's Estate; Koynok v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 K. R. v. Anderson Community School Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Kramer; Thompson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Kramer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Kramer v. Vision Cable of Pinellas, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Kramer v. Wichita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962 Krehnbrink v. Maryland Dept. of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Kreutzer v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Kristianson; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Krivonak v. Berkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842,1143 Krohn; Luhrs v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Krueger v. Woods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856,1023 Kruse; Chagrin Falls v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Kuban v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 Kubinski v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Kuchinskas v. Broward County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Kuhlmann; Moore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Kuhns v. Team Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Kukes, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Kukes v. Calderon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Kulick v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Kulinski v. Runyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890,904 Kumar v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841,1023 Kunkes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Kuntz v. Fadness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Kupcho v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Kupec; McCarthy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857,879 Kuykendall; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1049 Kwan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Kyle v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Kyo Lim v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Kyricopoulos v. Rollins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 L.; Allred v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Laakko; Maki v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Labansat v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 LaBarck v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Labatt Ltd. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 LaBayre v. Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Labella-Szuba v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Labickas v. Arkansas State Univ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Labor and Industry Review Comm'n; Pioterek v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR lxxxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Labor Union. See name of trade. LaBrunerie v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Lacey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Lackey v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 LaFave v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Lafayette Morehouse Inc. v. Chronicle Publishing Co. . . . . . . . . . 809 Laffond v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Lagoye v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Laidlaw Transit, Inc.; Creamer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1143 Laird v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Laird's Food Market; Conkle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Lake v. Hope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Lake Angelus; Gustafson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Lake at Las Vegas Investors Group, Inc. v. Botaba Realty Co. . . 863 Lakoski v. University of Tex. Medical Branch at Galveston . . . 947,1035 Lal v. Kennett Square . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Lamarr v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Lambrix v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958,1005 Lancaster v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Land v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Land v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Landels, Ripley & Diamond; Lane v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Landmark Land Co. of Carolina, Inc.; Barton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Landry v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Lane v. Landels, Ripley & Diamond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Lane v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Lane v. Russell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Lane; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Lang v. Furr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Lang v. Reynolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Langford v. LeCureux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Langston v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Lanier; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804 Lapierre v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 LaPointe v. Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 LaRene, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923 Larry v. Phillips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Larry v. Vaughn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Larson; Ethier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Lartey-Trapman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 LaRue v. Blodgett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 LaRue v. Rolfs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Larzelere v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Lasiter v. Thomas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED lxxxix Page Lassalle; Daniels v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Lassiter v. Reno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Laster v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Laszczynski v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Latessa; Hamm v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Lattanzio v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Laube v. Sunbeam Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Laube Co. v. Sunbeam Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Laufman v. Mayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837,1071 Lavigne v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Lawal v. Bridgetown Grill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Lawal v. Cobb County Bd. of Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Lawal v. Stanley Bostitch Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Law Firm of Jones, Waldo, Holbrook & McDonough; Bennett v. 1108 Law Practice of J. B. Grossman, P. A. v. SEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Lawrence v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937,1036 Lawrence v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Lawrence v. Melissa Holdings, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Lawrence v. Secretary of Treasury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803,1037 Lawson v. Fordice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Lawson v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Lawson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046,1058 Lawton v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Lawyer v. Department of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1088 Layeni v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Lazenby v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977,1027 Lazich v. Burrows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Lazore v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Leaf v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Leaphart v. Peterson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Leason; Hageman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Leaver v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977,1027 Leavitt; Penman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Lebedeva; Soto v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Lebow; Heil v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 LeCureux; Langford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 LeDuc v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Lee v. Berthelot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Lee v. Fuji Bank, Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005,1094 Lee v. Goodman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Lee v. Hall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Lee v. Lenhardt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Lee v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Lee v. Nuth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR xc TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Lee; Omoike v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Lee v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . 857,909,948,998,1022,1117,1139,1141 LeFebre v. Circuit Court of Wis., LaCrosse County . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Legal Assistance for Vietnamese Asylum Seekers, Inc.; Depart- ment of State v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,804,1106 Legal Services Corp.; Wilkinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Lehman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961 Leigh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Leinenbach v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Lekhovitser v. Lekhovitser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898,912 Lemann; Haynes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Le May v. Secretary of Health and Human Services . . . . . . . . . . 803 LeMay; Spencer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Lemons v. Department of Social Services of Mich. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Lenhardt; Lee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Lennartz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Lennon v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Lennox v. Evans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Lensing; Shelton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Leon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Leonard v. Brimfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Leonard; Brimfield v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Leonard v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Leonard; McMeans v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Leonard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977,1027 Leonardo; Davis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Lerebours v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Lermer Corp.; Lermer Germany GmbH v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Lermer Germany GmbH v. Lermer Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Lesley; Belcher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Letica Corp.; Martinez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Letsinger; Harrison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Levin, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946 Levin v. Maya Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Levindale Hebrew Geriatric Center and Hospital; Geary v. . . . . 805,982 Levine v. Central Fla. Medical Affiliates, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Levine v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Levinson, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Levitoff v. Glickman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Levy; Merchant v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Lewis; Brock v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Lewis; Caterpillar Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Lewis; Cookus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Lewis v. Hanlon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xci Page Lewis v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849,1096 Lewis; Montville v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Lewis; Olguini v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Lewis; Spivey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Lewis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841,1000 Lewis; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828,1071 Lewis Lang v. Reynolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Lewis Truck Parts & Equipment, Inc. v. Hall & Phillips . . . . . . . 1109 Lexie v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Leyva Osuna v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Liberty Bank & Trust Co.; Crossley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Life Ins. Co. of Ga. v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923 Light v. State Bar of Cal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Lightner v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Lim v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Lin v. Goldsboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Lin v. Superior Court of Cal., Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Linahan; Strickland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Linares v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Lincoln; Patterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Lincoln Loan Co. v. Portland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Lindemann v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Linden; General Motors Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Lindh v. Murphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1074 Lindler; Blandino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1102 Lindley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956,1049 Lindsey v. Alabama State Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Lindsey v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997,1072 Lipofsky v. New York State Ins. Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Lipton v. Swest, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Liquidation Estate, De Laurentiis Enter. Group v. Technicolor . . 1007 Lisa Lee Mines (Terrilynne Coal Co.) v. Director, OWCP . . . . . . 1090 Little v. Barry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Littlefield; Gunnell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842,1071 Litzenberg v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015,1143 Living Springs Retreat v. Putnam County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Livingston Union School Dist.; Takahashi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Lloyd v. Robinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Local. For labor union, see name of trade. Local 144 Pension Fund; Carroll v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834,1001 Lochman v. Charlevoix County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Lockerby v. Pima County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Lockheed Corp.; Chase v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Lockmiller v. Superior Court of Cal., Santa Clara County . . . . 929,1035 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR xcii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Lockwood; Doe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Lo Duca v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Loew v. Hibbard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Loewe v. Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Logan v. Beam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Logan v. Bennington College Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Logan v. German . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Logan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Lohman v. Hafley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Lomayaoma v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Lonchar, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 988 Lonchar v. Georgia Bd. of Pardons and Paroles . . . . . . . . . . . . . 988,989 Lonchar v. Hofbauer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Lonchar v. Turpin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 988 Long v. Love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Long v. Sparkman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833,842,987 Long v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859,898 Long Island Jewish Medical Center v. Schonholz . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Longshore v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Looker; Shelton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937,1049 Loomer v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Lopes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Lopez v. Monterey County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lopez v. Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Lopez v. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Lopez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872,879,883,938,1138 Lopez Camacho v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Lopez Garcia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 Lopreato v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Loral Corp.; Swiftships, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Lord v. DeLuca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Lorillard, Inc.; Braun v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Lory v. Philadelphia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Los Angeles; Steele v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016,1143 Los Angeles; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 Los Angeles County; Hall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Los Angeles County; Hickman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Los Angeles County; Jensen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Los Angeles County; Maxie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Los Angeles County; Tapar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Los Angeles County Dept. of Children & Family Services; Stone v. 936 Los Angeles County Dept. of Children's Services; Gregory C. v. 1081 Los Angeles County Superior Court; Brunson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Loss v. Attorney Grievance Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xciii Page Loss v. Michigan Parole Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Louis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Louisiana; Carr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851,1023 Louisiana; Cook v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Louisiana; Dixon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Louisiana; Gibson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Louisiana; Lennon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Louisiana; Mills v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Louisiana; Mitchell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Louisiana; Omoike v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Louisiana; Peters v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Louisiana; Pizzo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Louisiana; Poullard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Louisiana; Quatrevingt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Louisiana; Ranger Ins. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Louisiana; Sepulvado v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1035 Louisiana; Tart v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1035 Louisiana; Taylor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860,1023 Louisiana Dept. of Social Service; Hardy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Louisiana Dept. of Transportation and Development; Oswald v. . . 1008 Louisiana ex rel. Ieyoub v. CIGNA Healthplan of La., Inc. . . . . . 964 Louisiana Legislative Black Caucus v. Hays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804,1049 Louisiana-Pacific Corp.; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982,1072 Louisiana Tech Univ.; Pitre v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Love; Hildebrand v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Love; Long v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Love; Owens v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Love v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Love; Yount v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Lovett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Low Country Media, Inc.; Mosley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Lowe v. Cantrell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Lowe v. Craft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Lowe v. Doe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Lowe v. Holy Cross Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Lowe; Ireland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Lowe v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902,954 Lowe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807,826 Lowe; Young v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Lowe-Bey v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Lowery v. Redd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Lowery v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Lowery v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Lowrey; Curiale v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR xciv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Loyal American Life Ins. Co. v. Mattiace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 LTV Aerospace & Defense Co.; Dailey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Lu v. Turk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Lubin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Lucas v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Lucas v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Lucas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941,1002 Lucero; Olguin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Luckette v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Lucre, Inc. v. Gibson County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Ludmer; Nernberg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925 Ludwig; James Madison Ltd. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Luecke; Schnuck Markets, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Lugo v. Rocha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Luhrs v. Krohn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Luis v. Prunty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Lumley; Emmons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Luna v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Luna v. Walton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Lundis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Lundy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Lundy Packing Co.; Faircloth v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Lungren v. Doe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947,976 Lungren; Doe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947,976 Luongo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Lurie v. Caesar's Tahoe, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Lusk; Baker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Lusk v. Pope County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Lussier v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Lusty v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Luther Memorial Church; Olson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Lutz v. Corbett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Lutz; Palaimo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Luzik v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Lykus v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Lyman; Resetar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Lynce v. Mathis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433 Lynch v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Lynman; Resetar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072 Lynn, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006,1104 Lynn; McCabe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Lynnbrook Farms v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Lyon, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1075 Lyons v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xcv Page Lyons v. Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Ly Trinh Hinh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 M. v. Flour Bluff Independent School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 M.; K. D. H. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 M.; Special School Dist. No. 1 v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Maass; Cornell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 Maass; Scott v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Macalino v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Macaluso v. Anderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Macaluso v. Anderson Studios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 MacDonald v. Delaware County Bd. of Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Maceri v. Cimmino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 MacFarlane; California Franchise Tax Bd. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925 Machado; Albino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Macias v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Macias-Munoz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Maciel v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 MacInnes v. Borg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Mack v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943,979 Mack v. Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 MacKenzie v. Internal Revenue Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Madden v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Maddox v. Odom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Maddox v. Walker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Madigan; Wronke v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017,1143 Madison Correctional Institution; Colston v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Madison Ltd. v. Ludwig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Madrid v. Cambra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Magnotti v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Magoon v. Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Mahapatra v. Mahapatra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Mahern v. Adkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Mahoney; Sorensen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Maietta v. Artuz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Mail-Well Envelope Co.; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994,1085 Maine; Huntley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Maine Dept. of Corrections; Gifford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Maine Dept. of Human Services; Guilette v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Maine Dept. of Human Services; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Maine Real Estate Comm'n; St. Hilaire v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869,1023 Maine Workers' Compensation Bd.; Valliere v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Mains v. Hall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Major League Baseball; Durkin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Maki v. Laakko . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR xcvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Makowski; Welky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Mallard v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Mallory v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Malone; Cooper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855,1001,1062 Malone; Glendora v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932,1079 Maloney v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Mammah v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Mancuso; New York State Thruway Authority v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Mandarino v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Mandrgoc v. Patapsco & Back Rivers R. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Manhattan Beach; Farquhar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Manier, Herod, Hollabaugh & Smith; Can Do, Inc., Pension and Profit Sharing Plan and Sucessor Plans v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Manilla; Scott v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Mann v. Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Manning v. Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Manning v. Michigan Dept. of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Manning v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Manning v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Mantz v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Manuel Solloso; Castillo Reyes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Maples v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 Marable v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811,1022 Marbled Murrelet; Pacific Lumber Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Marbury v. Jabe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 March v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Marcum v. McAninch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Marcus v. Carrasquillo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Marek v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Margiotti v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Marin v. Norton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Marine Midland Business Loans, Inc.; Clardy Mfg. Co. v. . . . . . . . 1078 Marine Shale Processors, Inc. v. EPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Marin-Montoya v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Marino v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Marinoff v. Appellate Div., Sup. Ct. of N. Y., First Jud. Dept. 998,1143 Marion v. Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Marjani v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Mark v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Mark v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904,1035 Markoff v. Markoff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Marks v. Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Marks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,880 Marsh v. Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xcvii Page Marshall; Fink v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Marshall v. Kemp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Marshall; Rhinehart v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Marshall; Torres Serrano v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Marshall v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856,1117 Martel v. New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883,1024 Martha White Foods; Kelly Foods Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Martin v. Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Martin; Craig v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Martin; Matthews v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Martin; Nelson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Martin v. Ridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Martin; Schlicher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Martin v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Martin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903,1067 Martin v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Martin v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Martinac & Co.; Saratoga Fishing Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1027 Martinez v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Martinez v. Letica Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Martinez v. Senkowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 Martinez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905,907,1078,1133,1154 Martinez v. Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Martinez-Cortez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Martinez-Perez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Martinez-Villareal v. Stewart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Martini v. New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Martins v. Charles Hayden Goodwill Inn School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Marut; Russo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Marx v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Maryland; Collins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Maryland; Colvin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Maryland v. Dennis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Maryland; Ebb v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Maryland; Edwards v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Maryland; Froeman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Maryland; Grandison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027,1143 Maryland; Litzenberg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015,1143 Maryland; Mathews v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Maryland; Oken v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Maryland; Pettit v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Maryland v. Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408,804 Maryland Dept. of Agriculture; Kammefa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908,1036 Maryland Dept. of Ed.; Krehnbrink v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR xcviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Maryland Dept. of Health and Mental Hygiene; Brown v. . . . . . . 882 Maryland Dept. of Social Services; Amitin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Maryvale Samaritan Hospital; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Maskell; Roe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Mason v. Norwest Bank S. D., N. A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Mason v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc. v. Central States, S. E. & S. W. Areas Pension Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Masotto v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Massachusetts; Dempsey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892,1024 Massachusetts; Hill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Massachusetts; Hines v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Massachusetts; Kirkpatrick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Massachusetts; Laffond v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Massachusetts; LeDuc v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Massachusetts; Leonard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Massachusetts; Lykus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Massachusetts; Phachansiri v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Massachusetts; Trapp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Massachusetts; Waterman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Massachusetts; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Massachusetts Bar Counsel; Fordham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Massengale v. Mills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1102 Massey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942,1127 Mathew; Geiser v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Mathews v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Mathieu v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Mathis; Lynce v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433 Matta-Ballesteros v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Matta-Lopez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Matthews v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Matthews v. Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Matthews v. Price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Matthews v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877,941,973,986 Mattiace; Loyal American Life Ins. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Matyastik v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815,1072 Mauri v. Portland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Maxberry v. Paramount Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Maxie v. Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Maxie v. Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Maxwell v. Samson Resources Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 May v. Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 May v. Secretary of Health and Human Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Maya Construction; Levin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED xcix Page Mayer; Laufman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837,1071 Mayes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 Mayeux v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Mayo v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Mayo Foundation; Carmen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Mayor of District of Columbia; Little v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Mayor of Elyria; Harsel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Mayor of New York City v. Yourman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Mayor of San Benito; Garza v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950,1048 Mayrant v. Goff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Maza v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Mazurkiewicz; Dais v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Mazurkiewicz; Oliver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1023 Mazzei, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1146 Mazzell v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 M. C.; Central Regional School Dist. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866,979 McAdams v. Automotive Rentals, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 McAdams v. MNC Credit Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 McAlister v. Wheat Ridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 McAllister v. Telxon Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 McAllister v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 McAninch; Marcum v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 McBride v. Circuit Court of Va., Norfolk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 McBride; Evans v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 McBride v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 McCabe v. Department of Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 McCabe v. Lynn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 McCall v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 McCall v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 McCarthy v. Kupec . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857,879 McCarthy v. Recordex Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 McCarthy v. Teta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 McCarthy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,991,1101 McCarthy Brothers Co./Clark Bridge; Campbell v. . . . . . . . . . . . 950 McCarty v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903,1117 McCaughtry; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 McCaughtry; Pierce v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 McCausland; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 McClain v. Indiana Comm'n on Judicial Qualifications . . . . . . . . . 1027 McClendon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 McCloud; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 McClure v. Charlotte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 McConaghy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 McConico v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR c TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page McCoskey v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 McCoy v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 McCoy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070,1099 McCracken v. Coshocton County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 McCrady v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 McCree v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 McCullough v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935,1049 McCullough v. Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, Institutional Div. 832 McDade; Hook v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 959 McDaniel v. Berger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 McDaniel; Hogan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 McDaniel; Olsen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 McDaniels, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961,1053 McDermott, Inc. v. Capital Welding & Fabrication, Inc. . . . . . . . . 945 McDonald, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105 McDonald v. George Meany Center for Labor Studies . . . . . . . . . 1054 McDonald v. Inland Container Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895,1049 McDonald v. King County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 McDonald v. Saxton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 McDonald v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 McDonnell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 McDonnell Douglas Corp.; Roland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 McDuff v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835,1071 McFadden v. Hargett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 McFarland; South Division Credit Union v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 McFarland v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 McFarlane v. Esquire Magazine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 McGee v. Ieyoub . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 McGee v. Ingraham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 McGeeney v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 McGhee v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 McGhee v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 McGill v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 McGill v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 McGinnis; Doran v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 McGinnis; Glover v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 McGinnis; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 McGinnis, Inc. v. Stevens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 McGinnis, Inc.; Stevens v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 McGlory v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 McGowan v. Metropolitan Dade County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 McGrier v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 McHenry v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 McHenry v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED ci Page McIntosh v. Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 McIntosh v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 McIntyre v. Gilmore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 McIntyre; Nesson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 MCI Telecommunications Corp.; Teleconcepts, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . 815 MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. United Arab Emirates . . . . . . 1007 McKay v. Jobin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 McKenzie v. West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 McKinney v. Baldwin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 McKinney v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 McKinney v. Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 McKinnion v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 McKnight; Richardson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1002,1076 McKnight v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 McKoy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 McLaughlin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 McLennan Community College; Taylor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 McLeod v. Butterworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 McMahan; Dickey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 McMahon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 McManus v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 McMasters v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 McMeans v. Leonard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 McMillan v. Department of Interior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 McMillian v. Monroe County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025,1089 McMillian v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 McNabb v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 McNeil; Hein v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 McNeil v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 McNeill v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 McNemar v. Disney Stores, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 McQuade v. Kent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 McQueen v. Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 McQuilkin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 McQuown v. Department of Army . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 McShane v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 McVea; Umar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 McVicar v. Griffin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923 McWee v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 McWilliams v. Fairfax County Bd. of Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Meacham; Taylor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Meacham v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Meadows v. Hayling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Meadows v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Meany Center for Labor Studies; McDonald v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Mease; Bowlin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Medico v. Sobolevitch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Medina v. Butterworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025 Medina v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Medina v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Medina-Morales v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Medlock v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Medrano v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053 Medtronic, Inc.; Griffin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1104 Meeker; Overmyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Meeks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Meggs; Florida League of Professional Lobbyists, Inc. v. . . . . . . . 1010 Megrave v. Sacramento County Sheriff's Dept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Mehio v. Graber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Meinhardt; Unisys Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Mejia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Mejia-Uribe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Mejorado-Soto v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Mekler, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923,1087 Meko; Bradley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Melegrito v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Melendez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962 Melhorn v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Melissa Holdings, Inc.; Lawrence v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Meloy; Montgomery v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Melton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Melvin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Memro v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Mendel; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Mendenhall v. Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Mendez-Rosas v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . 1061 Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc.; Dammer v. . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Mercer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Merchant v. Levy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Merchant Bank; Swoyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Mercury Ins. Co.; Hoang v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Mercy Catholic Medical Center; Adelman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Meredith v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Merit Systems Protection Bd.; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Merit Systems Protection Bd.; Monclova v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Merit Systems Protection Bd.; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985,1049 Merrett v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.; Balasubramani v. . . 868 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED ciii Page Merritt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Meservy v. Meservy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855,1036 Meshell v. Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Messerschmidt v. Riley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Messick v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Messler v. Farmer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Mestman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004 Metcalf v. Carlton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Metler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Metro Dade County Building and Zoning Dept.; Goldberg v. . . . . 1098 Metro Industries, Inc. v. Sammi Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Metro-North Commuter R. Co. v. Buckley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958 Metropolitan Dade County; McGowan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Metropolitan Ed. Enterprises, Inc.; EEOC v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Metropolitan Ed. Enterprises, Inc.; Walters v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Metropolitan Govt. of Nashville & Davidson County v. Harrison 863 Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.; Coulter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Robertson-Ceco Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.; Robertson-Ceco Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.; Sullivan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Metropolitan Stevedore Co. v. Rambo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803,1002,1089 Metropolitan Transit Authority; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035 Mett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Metzer; Starr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Mew v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Meyer; Dahler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Meza v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990 Michael v. Zervakos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Michelin Aircraft Tire; Newport v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1024 Michelin Tire Corp.; Newport v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1024 Michigan v. Barrera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 945 Michigan; Burgos v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Michigan; Champion v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Michigan; Doyle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Michigan; Fisher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Michigan; Kaufman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Michigan; Kevorkian v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Michigan; King v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Michigan; Kulick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Michigan; LaFave v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Michigan; Marable v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811,1022 Michigan; McIntosh v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Michigan; Nelson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Michigan; Redge v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR civ TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Michigan; Szenay v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Michigan; Torres v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Michigan Attorney Discipline Bd.; Mouradian v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Michigan Dept. of Corrections; Manning v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources; Pure Waters, Inc. v. . . . . . 864 Michigan Dept. of Treasury; Zantop International Airlines, Inc. v. 1118 Michigan Ed. Assn.-NEA v. Bromley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Michigan Parole Bd.; Loss v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Michigan Pub. Serv. Comm'n; North Michigan Land & Oil Corp. v. 1007 Midcontinent Broadcasting Corp.; Hopewell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Middleton v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876,988 Mihaly v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Milam v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Miller v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Miller; Chandler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1051 Miller; Clarke v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Miller v. Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Miller v. Delaware River Port Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Miller v. Department of Labor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Miller; Douglas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Miller v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Miller; Ivy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Miller v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003 Miller; Perry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Miller v. Runyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Miller; Sharp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Miller v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Miller; Turentine v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Miller v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842,906,943,994 Miller; Zavesky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Milligan v. Erath County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Mills, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025 Mills v. Butterworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1024 Mills; Ellerbee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Mills v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025 Mills v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Mills; Massengale v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1102 Mills v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881,990 Milner v. Stainer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Milonas; Abdullah v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Miltland Raleigh-Durham; Mudie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Minarik v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Mincey, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1075 Mincieli v. Bruder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cv Page Minetti v. Port of Seattle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Minneapolis; Paisley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Minnesota; Fairway Foods, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Minnesota; Independent Charities of America, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . 993 Minnesota; Noltimier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Minnesota; Souvannarath v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Minnesota; Ubel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Minnesota; Vanderbeck v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Minnesota Dept. of Agriculture; Mmubango v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Minnich v. Deutch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Minniecheske, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Minnifield v. Department of Veterans Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Minor v. Prudential Securities, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Miranda v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Miranda v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Mirin v. Eyerly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Mississippi; Anderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Mississippi; Blue v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Mississippi; Horton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Mississippi; Russell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Mississippi; Taylor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994,1085 Mississippi; Walker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Mississippi; Whitworth v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Misskelley v. Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Missouri; Armentrout v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Missouri; Copeland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Missouri; Dees v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Missouri; Gary v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Missouri; Kreutzer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Missouri; Lee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Missouri; Manning v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Missouri; Mayo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Missouri; Nunley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Missouri; Richardson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Missouri; Schneider v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1103 Missouri; Taylor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Missouri; Tokar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Missouri; Weaver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Missouri; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Missouri Pacific R. Co.; Grantwood Village v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Missouri Parole Bd.; Cooper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Mitchell v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Mitchell; California v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Mitchell; Chalmars v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Mitchell; Ellison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Mitchell v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836,1022,1032,1143 Mitchell v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Mitchell; Rodriguez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Mitchell v. Roy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Mitchell v. Simonet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Mitchell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856,874,956,1083,1135 Mitchell-Angel v. Cronin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Mittleman v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Mizani v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Mizell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 M. L. B. v. S. L. J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Mmubango v. Minnesota Dept. of Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 MNC Credit Corp.; McAdams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Moates v. Walker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Moats v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Mobile Telecommunication Technologies Corp. v. FCC . . . . . . . . . 823 Modderno v. King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Moffitt, Zwerling & Kemler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Moghal v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Mohr v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Monaco v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Monclova v. Merit Systems Protection Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Moncrief v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Mongelli v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Monroe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Monroe v. U. S. Marshals Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Monroe County; McMillian v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025,1089 Montag v. American Honda Motor Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Montalvo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Montana; Ahmed v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Montana; Bell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Montana v. Fuller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Montanez v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Montanye v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Montcalm Publishing Corp.; Angelone v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Monterey County; Lopez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Montez Garcia v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Montgomery; Children's Healthcare Is a Legal Duty, Inc. v. . . . . 1149 Montgomery; Greene v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867,1023 Montgomery v. Meloy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Montgomery v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Montgomery County Police Dept.; Kimble v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Montoya v. Stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cvii Page Montoya v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852,1133 Montue v. Gomez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Montville v. Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Moody v. Alabama Dept. of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Moody v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Moore, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926 Moore v. Brewster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Moore; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Moore; Calderon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Moore; Dupree v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1103 Moore v. Groose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Moore v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Moore v. Ingebretsen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Moore v. Jacobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Moore v. Kuhlmann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Moore; Lawson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Moore; Lindsey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997,1072 Moore; Mazzell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Moore; Merrett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Moore; Middleton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876,988 Moore v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Moore v. Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Resources . . . . . . 815 Moore v. Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Moore; Truesdale v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Moore v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802,842,904,1100,1154 Moore; Valder v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Moorehead v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Moorman v. Florida Dept. of Community Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Mora v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Morales; Black v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Morales; Calderon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1001 Morales; Salazar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Morales v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Moran v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Moreno v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973,1060,1068,1078,1137 Moreno Valley Unified High School Dist.; Weiss v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Moreo; Dutcher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Morera v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Moretti, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805,926,1089 Morgan v. Nevada Bd. of Prison Comm'rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Morgan; Rayford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Morgan v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Morgart v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Bd. of Pa. . . . . . . . . 936 Morrell, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026,1074 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Morrell; Generes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Morris; Barton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Morris; Grey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Morris v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868,883,904 Morrison v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887,944,1047,1130,1154 Morrison; Wallace v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Morstein; Shaw Agency v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Mortgage Creditcorp., Inc.; Pipkin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Mortgage Network, Inc. v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. . 812 Mortgage Network, Inc. v. Freddie Mac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Mortham; Biddulph v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Morton v. Bolden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Morton; Coburn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Morton; Coleman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Morton; Kontakis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898,1001 Morvant v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Mosby v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Moschgat v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Bd. of Pa. . . . . . . . 1017 Moseley v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Moseley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941,1036 Moses v. American Nonwovens, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Moses v. Evanston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Moses v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Moskovits v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Moskowitz; Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Mosley v. Low Country Media, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Moss v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Mother African Union First Colored Meth. Prot. Church; African Union Meth. Prot. Church and Connection v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Mother African Union First Colored Meth. Prot. Church; Confer- ence of African Union First Colored Meth. Prot. Church v. . . . 1042 Mountaineer Gas Co.; Oil Workers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Mount Calvary Baptist Church; Church Mut. Ins. Co. v. . . . . . . . 818 Mount Calvary Baptist Church and School; Church Mut. Ins. Co. v. 818 Mouradian v. Michigan Attorney Discipline Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Movsesian v. Hamer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Moya; Harrison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Moya v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Mua v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Mudie v. Miltland Raleigh-Durham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Mueller; Wisconsin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Muhammad, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Muhammad v. Nuchia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Muhummad v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cix Page Mujahid v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 Multnomah County v. Pierce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Muniz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Munoz-Mosquera v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Munson v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Muracciole v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Muraski, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037 Muraski v. Thomas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Murdock; Riley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Murillo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Muro; Jhaveri v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Murphy; Coleman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Murphy; Cross v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026,1153 Murphy v. Kelly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Murphy; Lindh v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1074 Murphy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Murray, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1089 Murray v. America's Talking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Murray v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Murray; Blake v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Murray v. Cable National Broadcasting Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Murray v. Thompson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Murray v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Murrell v. University of S. C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835,1071 Muse v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Musick v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Myers v. Burns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Myers; Hollar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969,1085 Myers; Sharp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Nachreiner Boie Art Factory v. Goris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Nagi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Nagle; Ragan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Nagy, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027,1143 Nahodil v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Nance v. Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Nance v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Nance; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Narducci v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Narlock v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Narumanchi v. Abdelsayed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Nash v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 National Aeronautics and Space Administration; Thompson v. . . . 864 National Assn. of Home Bldrs. of U. S. v. Chesterfield County . . . 1056 National Assn. of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . 892 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page National Casualty Ins. Co.; Pruitt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 National Corp. of Housing Partnerships; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . 859,1023 National Credit Union Admin. v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. . . 1148 Nationalist Movement v. Cumming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 NLRB; AutoZone, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 NLRB; Banknote Corp. of America, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 NLRB; Borden, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 NLRB; C & D Charter Power Systems, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 NLRB; Daily News of Los Angeles v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 NLRB; Dayton Hudson Department Store Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 NLRB; Electro-Voice, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 NLRB; Greenspan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 NLRB; Jenkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 NLRB; Teamsters v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 National Railroad Passenger Corp.; Hedden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 National Super Markets, Inc. v. Varner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 National Super Markets, Inc.; Varner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 National Transportation Safety Bd.; Bernstein v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 National Transportation Safety Bd.; Sweeney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 National Westminster Bank, USA; Hargett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 NationsBanc Mortgage Corp.; Cazier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 NationsBank; Shumate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871,1035 Navarrette v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Nawachie v. Department of Veterans Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 N. B. v. Alachua County School Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Neadle v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Neal v. Regan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Neal v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855,1114,1115 Nebraska v. Reeder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Nebraska v. Ryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Nebraska v. Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 Nedell, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004,1146 Neely v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Negewo v. Abebe-Jiri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Nelkin; Panzer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Nelson, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Nelson v. J. C. Penney Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Nelson v. Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Nelson v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Nelson v. Nelson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Nelson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807,939,972,1093 Nennig; Oney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871,1048 Nernberg v. Ludmer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925 Nero v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxi Page Nesbitt v. Hopkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Ness; Ramer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Nesson v. McIntyre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Nestler v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Netherland; Beaver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Netherland; Dubois v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Netherland v. Gray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1301 Netherland; Gray v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925,1157 Netherland; Hoke v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Netherland; Langston v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Netherland; O'Dell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1049,1050 Netherland; Payne v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977 Netherland; Stout v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1036 Netherland; Tuggle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894,1024 Netherland; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Netherland; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Neuman v. Bennett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Neumann v. Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Neuton v. City National Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979,1079 Nevada; Blandino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Nevada; Bonta v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Bonty v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Dickeson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Nevada; Domingues v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Nevada; Dortch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Nevada; Everhart v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Nevada; Fisher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Garrett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Gauthier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Gould v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Nevada; Grasmick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Harpster v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Homick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Nevada; Jessop v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Nevada; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Land v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Macalino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Nevada; Mohr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Nevada; Moncrief v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Nevada; Reberger v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Nevada; Robinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Nevada; Sierra v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Nevada; Staude v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Nevada; Walker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Nevada; Wesley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Nevada; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada; Wood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Nevada Bd. of Prison Comm'rs; Morgan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Nevada County; Troutwine Family Trust v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Neville v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 New Beginnings Adoption and Counseling Agency v. Cesnik . . . . 1110 New Hampshire; Forbey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 New Hampshire; Kochvi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 New Hampshire; Martel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883,1024 New Hampshire; Nowaczyk v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 New Hampshire; Seymour v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 New Hampshire; Veale v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 New Hampshire Dept. of HHS, Office of Child Support; Friedline v. 811 New Jersey; Graham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 New Jersey; Martini v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 New Jersey v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 New Jersey; Roach v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 New Jersey; Tafuto v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 New Jersey v. Womack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Newkirk-Stewart; Crawford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 New Mexico; Aguilar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852,1023 New Mexico; Aguilar Riley Ozmen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985,1072 New Mexico; Texas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803,979 New Mexico Dept. of Corrections; Herrera v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 New Mexico Right to Choose; Klecan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 959 Newport v. Michelin Aircraft Tire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1024 Newport v. Michelin Tire Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1024 Newton; Riley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 New Valley Corp. v. New Valley Corp. Senior Executive Benefit Plan Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 New Valley Corp. Senior Executive Benefit Plan Participants; New Valley Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 New York; Baptiste v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 New York; Berk v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 New York; Butler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 New York; Dixon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 New York; Draghi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 New York; Hameed v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 New York; Jelinek v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 New York; Lane v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 New York; McShane v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 New York; New Jersey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 New York; Santos v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxiii Page New York; Strobridge v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825,1022 New York; Walker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 New York; Waugh v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 New York; Weaver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 New York; Welz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 New York; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 New York; York v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 New York; Zientek v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 New York City; Hasenstab v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 New York City; JA­RU v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 New York City; Skeet v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 New York City Dept. of Cultural Affairs; Ishikawa v. . . . . . . . . . 883 New York City Human Resources Administration; de la Cruz v. 805 New York Daily News; Reape v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063,1156 New York State Bd. of Law Examiners; Gill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 New York State Electric & Gas Corp.; Jemzura v. . . . . . . . . . . 953,1036 New York State Ins. Fund; Lipofsky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 New York State Thruway Authority v. Mancuso . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Nguyen v. Dalton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045,1143 Nguyen v. Department of Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848,1023 Nguyen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.; Graham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Nicholas v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Nichols v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977,1027 Nicholson v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Nickelson v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Nierengarten v. Wisconsin Dept. of Health and Social Services . . 932 Nishi/Hompa Hongwaji Temple; Buc-Hanan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Nitzschke; Burgess v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Nobile v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Noble v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Noel v. Adelphia Cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Noel v. International Cablevision, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Noltimier v. Court of Appeals of Minn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Noltimier v. Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Norand Corp.; EMC Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Nordahl v. Studer Revox America, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Nordberg v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Nordquest v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. Chittum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034 Norgaard; Wilkerson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Norman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Norris; Cloird v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Norris v. Gimmel, Weiman, Savitz & Kronthal, P. A. . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Norris; Graham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Norris; Huffman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Norris; McCullough v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935,1049 Norris; Parker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Norris; Pitts v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Norris; Ruiz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963,1073 Norris; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Norris; Wainwright v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968,1073 North, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 North Alamo Water Supply Corp.; San Juan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 North Arkansas Community Technical College; Hadley v. . . . . . . 1148 North Avenue Novelties, Inc. v. Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 North Bergen; Tonnelle Ave. Books & Video, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . 1115 North Carolina; Barrett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 North Carolina; Bates v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 North Carolina; Best v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 North Carolina; Bishop v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 North Carolina; Boyd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 North Carolina; Buckner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 North Carolina; Burke v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 North Carolina; Chandler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 North Carolina; Cole v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 North Carolina; DeCastro v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 North Carolina; Floyd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896 North Carolina; Hunt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 North Carolina; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 North Carolina; Kandies v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 North Carolina; Keel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 North Carolina; Kirkland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 North Carolina; Lucas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 North Carolina; Lyons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 North Carolina; Moseley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 North Carolina; Penland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 North Carolina; Richardson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 North Carolina; Rowsey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 North Carolina; Sessoms v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 North Carolina; Walker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 North Carolina; Ward v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 North Carolina; White v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 North Carolina; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061,1156 North Carolina; Womble v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 North Carolina Bar; Golia-Paladin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 North Carolina Dept. of Corrections; Cousins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 North Dakota Assn. of Retarded Citizens v. Schafer . . . . . . . . . . 993 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxv Page Northern States Power Co. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 North Michigan Land & Oil Corp. v. Michigan Pub. Serv. Comm'n 1007 Northrop Corp.; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Norton; Cochran v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Norton; Marin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Norwest Bank S. D., N. A.; Mason v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Norwood v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Nouraie v. West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838,1022 Novak v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Nowaczyk v. New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Nuchia; Muhammad v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Nugent v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904,941 Nunez-Elizarraraz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Nunley v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Nuth; Lee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Nwobi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Nynex Corp.; Pocchia v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 NYSA­ILA Medical and Clinical Services Fund; De Buono v. . 926,1088 Oakland Housing Authority; Key v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Oaks v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 O'Brien v. Bank One Columbus, N. A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 O'Brien; Davis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041,1143 O'Brien v. Employment Appeal Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 O'Brien v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 O'Brien v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942,1036,1068 Ocean City; Storer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Ochoa v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 O'Connell & Associates; Stover v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 O'Connor v. Army Claims Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 O'Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Odeco Oil & Gas Co., Drilling Division; Bonnette v. . . . . . . . . . . . 822 O'Dell v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1049,1050 Odom; Maddox v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Odoms v. Hatcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 OEC Medical Systems, Inc.; Toshiba America Medical Systems v. 808 Office Employees v. Pope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Office of Civilian Health and Medical Program of Uniformed Serv- ices; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Office of Personnel Management; Almero v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Office of Personnel Management; Alver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843,891 Office of Personnel Management; Campbell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Office of Personnel Management; Diaz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Office of Personnel Management; Dunworth v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Office of Personnel Management; Eguita v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Office of Personnel Management; Falciso v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Office of Personnel Management; Fredeluces v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Office of Personnel Management; Medlock v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Office of Personnel Management; Mittleman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Office of Personnel Management; Royster v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Office of Personnel Management; Sobocinski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Office of Personnel Management; Walton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Office of Thrift Supervision; Cousin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Official Committee of Tort Claimants v. Dow Corning Corp. . . . . 1071 Offiong v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Ogbeide v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Ogbomon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805,1051,1073 Ogden v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 O'Gilvie v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Oglebay Norton Co.; Scypta v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Oglesby Plant Laboratories, Inc.; Atkinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037 Oguguo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 O'Guinn v. Dutton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 O'Guinn; Dutton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1084 O'Hagan; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087 Ohio; Allard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Ohio; Awkal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Ohio; Ballew v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Ohio; Bell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Ohio; Benge v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Ohio; Childs v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882,1024 Ohio; Day v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Ohio; Haley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Ohio; Hawkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847,1016 Ohio; Hill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Ohio; Jennings v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Ohio; Loomer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Ohio; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003 Ohio; Nichelson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Ohio; Otte v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Ohio; Rojas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Ohio v. Robinette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Ohio; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Ohio; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Ohio; Wogenstahl v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Ohio Adult Parole Authority; Wright v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation; Salyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Ohio Lottery Comm'n; Couchot v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Ohio Medical Bd.; Vaughn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923,965 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxvii Page Oil Workers v. Mountaineer Gas Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Oiness v. Walgreen Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Oken v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Oklahoma; Anthony v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Oklahoma; Ballard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Oklahoma; Boyd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Oklahoma; Cargle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Oklahoma; Cudjo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Oklahoma; Duckett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Oklahoma; Foster v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Oklahoma; Givings v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Oklahoma; Hain v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Oklahoma; Hedrick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Oklahoma; Jeffries v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935,1035 Oklahoma; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Oklahoma; Knighton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Oklahoma; Lowe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902,954 Oklahoma; Lusty v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Oklahoma; Moore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Oklahoma; Parker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Oklahoma; Pennington v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Oklahoma; Quate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Oklahoma; Richie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Oklahoma; Romano v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Oklahoma; Shabazz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Oklahoma; Smallwood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Oklahoma; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Oklahoma; Stadler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1064 Oklahoma; Storey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Oklahoma; Trim v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Oklahoma; Vann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Oklahoma; Walters v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Oklahoma; White v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Oklahoma Dept. of Human Services; Vann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. Burks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Okorie v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Okparaocha v. Taco Bell Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Olachea-Jimenes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Olano v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Old Chief v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 Oldsmar; Rood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Olguin v. Lucero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Olguini v. Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Oliver v. Mazurkiewicz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1023 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Oliver v. Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Olivo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Olk Long; Rhode v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Olsen v. Drug Enforcement Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Olsen v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Olsen v. McDaniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Olson, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1146 Olson v. Fairfax-Falls Church Community Services Bd. . . . . . . . . 1099 Olson v. Luther Memorial Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Olson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Omaha; Brodnicki v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Omnitrition International, Inc. v. Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Omoike v. Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Omoike v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Onaghise v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 O'Neil; Chaudhary v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833,1035 O'Neil v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 O'Neill v. Auburn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 One World One Family Now v. Honolulu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Oney v. Nennig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871,1048 Onitiri v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Option Care, Inc.; Rennick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Ordonoz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Oregon; Allen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Oregon; Blagg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Oregon; Graham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Oregon; May v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Oregon; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Oregon; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Oregon Bd. of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision; Whaley v. . . . 898 Oregon Natural Desert Assn.; Bibles v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 Orellana-Osorio v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Organon, Inc. v. Kessler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Organon, Inc.; Kessler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101 Oriakhi v. Baltimore City Jail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Oriakhi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Oriental Jade Restaurant v. Goldsboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Orientations Gallery, Inc. v. Bakery Centre Associates . . . . . . . . 812 Orlando Rivas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Orme v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Ornelas-Martinez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 O'Rourke v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Orozco v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxix Page Ortiz v. John O. Butler Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Ortiz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884,900,1078 Osayande v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Osband v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Osborne v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Osinowo v. Comptroller of New York City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Osorio v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 O'Steen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Osuna v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Oswald v. Louisiana Dept. of Transportation and Development . . 1008 Otte v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Overmyer v. Meeker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Overstreet; Rogers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Owens v. Love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Owens v. Presbyterian Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033,1143 Owens v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003 Owens v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Owens-Brockway Glass Container, Inc.; Austin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Owes v. Sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Owusu v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Oxford House-C. v. St. Louis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Oxfort v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Oy v. Aldy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Ozmen v. New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985,1072 Ozuna Galan v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Pacific-CSC Work Furlough; George v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Pacific Gas & Electric Co.; Fischbach & Moore, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . 1056 Pacific Lumber Co. v. Marbled Murrelet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Pacific-Major Construction Co.; Koven v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Packer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,1099 Padilla v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Padilla v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Pagan v. Stepanik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Page; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Page; Neumann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Page v. Runyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977 Page v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 Paige; Hartley Marine Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Painters; Tsimbidaros v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Paisley v. Minneapolis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Palacios v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Palaimo v. Lutz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Paland v. Brooktrails Community Services Dist. Bd. of Directors 1124 Pallett, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1107 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Palma; Verex Assurance, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Palmer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Palmieri v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Panthong, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926 Panton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Panzer v. Nelkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Papai; Harbor Tug & Barge Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026,1038 Paramount Communications; Maxberry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Paramus Bd. of Ed.; Charlton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Para-Ordnance Mfg., Inc. v. SGS Importers International, Inc. . . 822 Pararas-Carayannis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925,1012 Parenteau, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806,1036 Pargo v. Elliott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Parham v. PepsiCo, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1102 Paries v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Parisi v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Park v. Howard Univ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Parke; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Parker v. Boyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Parker; Crawley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Parker v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs . . 812 Parker; Gilbert v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Parker v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Parker v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Parker; Pazol v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Parker v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843,1068,1134 Parker; Watkins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Parker v. Zant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Park Place Apartments; Struve v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Parks, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990 Parkson Corp. v. ACS Construction Co. of Miss. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Parrado v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Parrish, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926 Parrish v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Parsons, Brinkerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc.; United States ex rel. Paul v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Partee v. Pastrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012,1102 Pasadena City College; Waszak v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Passman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1146 Pastrick; Partee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012,1102 Pataki; Brooks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Pataki Administration; DeCastro v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Patapsco & Back Rivers R. Co.; Mandrgoc v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Patch v. Richardson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxi Page Patch v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Patel v. Scotland Memorial Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Patel v. Singer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Patrick v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Patriot-News Co.; Ertel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Patrissi; Forbes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Patterson v. District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Patterson; Haynes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952,1064 Patterson v. Lincoln . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Patterson v. P. H. P. Healthcare Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Patterson v. Rubin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Patterson v. Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Paul v. Parsons, Brinkerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . 868 Paul Revere Ins. Group.; Amayo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Paulsen v. Beyond, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Pavlico v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Payne, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053 Payne v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977 Payne v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Payton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Pazol v. Parker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Peagler v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Pearson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047,1060 Peat Marwick Main & Co.; Scottish Heritable Trust, PLC v. . . . . 869 Peavy, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037 Peck v. Chafin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Pelaez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Pellella; Gould v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Pels v. District of Columbia Bar Assn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Penland v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Penman v. Leavitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Pennington; Garner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Pennington v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Pennington & Haben, P. A.; Edgewarter Sun Spot, Inc. v. . . . . . . 931 Pennsylvania; Balog v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Pennsylvania; Boyd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Pennsylvania; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Pennsylvania; Cook v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Pennsylvania; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Pennsylvania; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Pennsylvania; Kosisky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Pennsylvania; McGill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Pennsylvania; Minarik v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Pennsylvania; Narducci v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Pennsylvania; Rapid Return, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Pennsylvania v. Riley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 913 Pennsylvania; Rodriguez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Pennsylvania; Rubio v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Pennsylvania; Saranchak v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Pennsylvania; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Pennsylvania; Speight v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Pennsylvania; Stevens v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Pennsylvania; Stokes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Pennsylvania; Van Doren v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Pennsylvania; Veneri v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Pennsylvania; Vey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Pennsylvania; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Resources; Moore v. . . . . . 815 Pennsylvania Higher Ed. Assistance Agency; Barry v. . . . . . . . . . 834 Pennsylvania Nurses Assn. v. Pennsylvania State Ed. Assn. . . . . 1110 Pennsylvania State Ed. Assn.; Pennsylvania Nurses Assn. v. . . . . 1110 Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.; Kauble v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Pension Fund, Int'l Union of Operating Engineers, #478; Gary v. 938 Peoria School Dist. 150; Gordon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071 PepsiCo, Inc.; Parham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1102 Perales; Concourse Nursing Home v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Perdue v. Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Perez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Perez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856,1135,1147 Perez; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990 Perkins v. Derstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Perkins v. Gomez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Perkins v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976,1059,1136 Perrill; Harvey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Perrill; Small v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Perry; Altimus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Perry; DCX, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Perry v. Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Perry; Thomasson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Perry; Turner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Perry v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Perry; Waller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Perryman v. Prado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Persimmon Hollow Co. v. Austin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Petaway v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Peters v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Peters; Wittmer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Peterson v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxiii Page Peterson v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096,1122 Peterson; Leaphart v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Peterson v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Peterson; Stjernholm v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Peterson; Tierney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984,1072 Peterson v. Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Peth, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027 Petrie; Scambos v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Pettit v. Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Pettus v. I. T. O. Corp. of Va. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Peugh; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 PFS Corp. v. Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Phachansiri v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Phea v. Benson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Phelps v. Denton County Sheriff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878,1023 Philadelphia v. Contractors Assn. of Eastern Pa., Inc. . . . . . . . . . 1113 Philadelphia; Lory v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Philadelphia; Regalbuto v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Philadelphia School Dist.; Barbee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Philadelphia Tax Review Bd.; Brighton Management Services v. 966 Philadelphia Tribune Co. v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Phillips; Larry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Phillips v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878,906 Phoenix; Baker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979 Phoenix; Sabelko v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Phoenix Institute for Research & Ed., Ltd.; Green v. . . . . . . . . . . 1028 P. H. P. Healthcare Corp.; Patterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Pickett; Kashannejad v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Pickett v. Warr Acres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Picklesimer v. Cox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Picone v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Pierce v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Pierce v. McCaughtry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Pierce; Multnomah County v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Pierce v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Pierson, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Pierson v. Wilshire Terrace Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994,1085 Pievsky v. Ridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Pigott v. United Homes for Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Pike v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Pilot Air Freight Corp. v. Jellico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Pilot Air Freight Corp. v. Jellico Studio of Western Art . . . . . . . 871 Pima County; Lockerby v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Pineda Duque v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Pineda-Hernandez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Pioterek v. Labor and Industry Review Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Pipefitters Local Union No. 522 Benefit Plan; Abbott v. . . . . . . . . 1111 Pipes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Pipkin v. Mortgage Creditcorp., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Pipola v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Pippin v. Bennett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817,1022 Piscataway Township Bd. of Ed. v. Taxman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1089 Pitre v. Louisiana Tech Univ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Pitt, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1075 Pitts v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Pitts v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Pittsburgh v. Beck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Pizzo v. Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014,1102 Pizzo v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Plain v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Plainview-Old Bethpage Central School Dist. v. Donato . . . . . . . . 1150 Plante v. Gallant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Plante v. Ipswich Police Dept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Plassman v. Wauseon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Plescher v. Wille . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Pless v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Pletz v. Thoeny . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Plumbers v. Reno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Plunkett; Duchene v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Plust, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1037 Pocchia v. Nynex Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Poe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Pohlman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Poindexter v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Poissenot v. Dallas Cowboys Football Club . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Polak-Rudich v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Polanco v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Police Dept. of Bossier City; Fuller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Polischuk, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990,1074 Polite v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Pollack v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Poly v. Cargill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Poly v. Cargill Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Poly-Tech Industries, Inc. v. Insty*Bit, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Ponce-Partida v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Poodry; Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Poole v. Holland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Pool Energy Services Co.; Andrick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxv Page Pope v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Pope v. Hunt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804 Pope v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Pope; Office Employees v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Pope v. Pope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Pope County; Lusk v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Popejoy v. Boston Pointe Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Poritz; Probation Association of N. J. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Portanova; Seniw v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Portee v. Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Porter v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Port Huron; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Portillo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Portland; Clark v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Portland; Lincoln Loan Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Portland; Mauri v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Port of Seattle; Minetti v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Postmaster General; Baker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1023 Postmaster General; Bowman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Postmaster General; Gate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Postmaster General; Hernandez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Postmaster General; Kulinski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890,904 Postmaster General; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Postmaster General; Page v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977 Postmaster General; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1022 Potlatch Corp.; Humphrey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Potter; Howard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Poullard v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Powell v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Power v. Alexandria Physicians Group, Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Power Computing Co.; Sapp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Powers v. Bayliner Marine Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Prado; Perryman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Prado v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Prechtl v. Witkowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Preferred Meal Systems, Inc. v. Kalwaytis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Presbyterian Hospital; Owens v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033,1143 Prescott Co.; Holt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 President Judge, Court of Common Pleas, 41st Judicial Dist., Juni- ata and Perry Counties, Orphan's Court Division; Vencil v. . . . 862 President of U. S.; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 President of U. S.; Sanders v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 President of U. S.; Tierney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901,988 Pressman Toy Corp.; Hofmann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828,977 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Preston v. Berry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Presto Roofing Co.; Hammons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Previtte v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Price, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806,1076 Price; Allen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Price v. Bossier Parish School Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Price; Brooks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Price v. Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Price; Matthews v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Price v. S­B Power Tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Price v. Skil Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Price v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927,1078,1082 Pridgett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Priest v. Donovan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958 Prince v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Prince v. Unsecured Creditors Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Prince William County; Hetzel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Principal Financial Group, Inc.; Taylor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Principato, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004,1146 Pringle v. Wolfe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Printz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979 Pritchett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Probate Judge for Jasper County v. South Carolina Bd. of Comm'rs of Judicial Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Probation Association of N. J. v. Poritz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Pro-Choice Network of Western N. Y.; Schenck v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 Proctor v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Produce Place v. Department of Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Protopappas v. Ratelle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Prudential Securities, Inc.; Minor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Pruitt v. National Casualty Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Prunty; Adesanya v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1062 Prunty; Luis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Prunty; Stephen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Prunty; Wilson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Pry; Ezeoke v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Ptarmigan Co.; Bolt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Public Building Comm'n of Chicago; Bowden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Puckett; Brewer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844,1001 Puckett; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Puerto Rico; Concepcion v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Puerto Rico; Velez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067,1157 Pugh v. Huffman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851 Pulgaron v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxvii Page Pulitzer Publishing Co.; Webb v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Pullen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884,1066 Punchard, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962 Pure Waters, Inc. v. Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources . . . . . . 864 Purity Supreme, Inc.; Doe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Purta; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Pusl v. Pusl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Putnam County; Living Springs Retreat v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Putra; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Pyatt; Schneider National Carriers, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Qasguargis v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . 1148 Quad City Times; Campbell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Quasha; Zucker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Quate v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Quatrevingt v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Quesada v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106 Quigley; Vencil v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Quijano v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Quill; Richardson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Quill; Vacco v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 Quintana v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Quintanilla v. Downey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Quintero-Barraza v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Quisenberry v. County Collection Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Qureshi v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 R. v. Anderson Community School Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 R.; Cindy R. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 R. v. James R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Raban Supply Co.; Hussein v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951,1072 Rachal v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803,1043 Rafael v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Raffield v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Ragan v. Nagle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Ragland v. Hundley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Ragland v. SMS Financial, L. L. C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Rahman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Rainier v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Rambo; Metropolitan Stevedore Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803,1002,1089 Rambo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Ramer v. Ness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Ramirez v. Belanger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Ramirez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850,883,974,1012 Ramirez v. Wichita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Ramirez-Ferrer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Ramirez-Valdez, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Ramiro Muniz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Ramos v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905,956 Ramos-Garcia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Ramsey v. Chubb LifeAmerica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Ramsey v. Colonial Life Ins. Co. of America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Ramsey; Holmberg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Randall v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Randell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Randy, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962 Raney; Clemons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Raney v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069,1157 Ranger Ins. Co. v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Ransom v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Ranum v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Rapid Return, Inc. v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Rash; Associates Commercial Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1086,1106 Rashid v. Society Hill Savings and Loan Assn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Rashid v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908,1099 Ratcliff, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806,1001 Ratcliff v. Daniel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Ratelle; Protopappas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Rawlins v. Allen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016,1102 Rawls v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Ray v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Ray v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Ray v. Willett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Rayford v. Bosse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Rayford v. Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Raytheon Engineers & Constructors, Inc.; Sanders v. . . . . . . . . . 925 Reams v. Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Reape v. New York Daily News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063,1156 Reberger v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Rebolledo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Recession Hearing Official; Scott v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Recordex Services, Inc.; McCarthy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Rector and Bd. of Visitors of Univ. of Va.; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Redd v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Redd; Lowery v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Redding v. Independent School Dist. No. 33 of Creek County . . . 949 Redge v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Reece v. Houston Lighting & Power Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Reed v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Reed v. Chevron Pipe Line Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxix Page Reed; Rochester v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Reed v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Reed; Swoyer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Reed v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Reeder; Nebraska v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Reedom v. Fort Worth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046 Rees v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Reese v. Columbus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Reese v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 Reeves v. Hopkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Regalbuto v. Philadelphia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Regan; Neal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Regas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1068 Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Doe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425,804,947 Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Shalala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Regional Transportation Dist.; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021,1102 Register v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Rehman v. ECC International Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923,993,1029 Rehman v. Garwood, McKenna & McKenna, P. A. . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 Rehman v. Garwood, McKenna, McKenna & Wolf . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Rehnquist; Kimble v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035 Reich; Acura of Bellevue v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Reich; Bechtel Energy Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Reich; G*UB*MK Constructors v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Reich; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Reich; Lopez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Reich; Stangl v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Reid v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133,1140 Reilley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 Reiman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 Reiman v. Brousse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Reiman v. Wagstaff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Reimer & Koger Assoc.; Kansas Public Employees Ret. System v. 948 Reinbold v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Reinhard v. Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Bd. of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Rendelman v. Keohane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Rennick v. Option Care, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025 Reno v. Bossier Parish School Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Reno; Cisneros v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Reno; Dee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873,1001 Reno; Lassiter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Reno; Plumbers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Reno; Tlaga v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Reno; zu Mike v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Renteria-Caicedo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Republican National Committee v. Federal Election Comm'n . . . 1055 Resetar v. Lyman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954,1072 Resnik v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Restrepo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Retired Chicago Police Assn. v. Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Reveles-Ramos v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Revell; Wess v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Revere Ins. Group.; Amayo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Rexene Corp.; Vega v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Reyes v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Reyes v. Manuel Solloso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Reyes v. Roe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Reyes v. Standard Mortgage Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Reyes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Reyes Miranda v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Reynolds v. Buchholzer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Reynolds; Lewis Lang v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Reynolds v. Tele-Communications, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849,1001 Reynolds Fisheries v. Buchholzer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Allgood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930,1035 Rezaabady v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Rhinehart v. Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Rhines v. South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Rhoades; Shores v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Rhode v. Olk Long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Rhode Island; Warwick Mall Trust v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Rhoton v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Riascos-Suarez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Riazco v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Rice v. Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Richards v. General Services Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 896,1024 Richards v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003,1093 Richards v. Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052,1106 Richardson; Akins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Richardson; Bryan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Richardson v. Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Richardson v. McKnight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1002,1076 Richardson v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Richardson v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Richardson; Patch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Richardson v. Quill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Richardson; Salter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxxi Page Richardson; Santangelo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Richardson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807,954,1030 Richardson v. Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Richie v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Richmond; Amato v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Rickett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Ricketts v. Hartford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Riddick v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083,1126 Ridge; Martin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Ridge; Pievsky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Ries, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Riggle; Burnett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Riley; Corthron v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Riley; Messerschmidt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Riley v. Murdock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Riley v. Newton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Riley; Pennsylvania v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 913 Riley Ozmen v. New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985,1072 Rissler & McMurry Co. v. Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Rivas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Rivas Linares v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Rivera v. Keane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Rivera v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942,1018,1020 Rivera-Flores v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Rivers v. Federal Express Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Rivers v. Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Riverview Nursing Centre, Inc.; Sheppard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Rivkin v. Dover Township Rent Leveling Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 Rizzi v. Underwater Construction Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Allgood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930,1035 R. J. Steichen & Co.; Honn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Roa v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Roach; Ibrahim v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Roach v. New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Roach v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Roach v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Roark v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Robbins; Auer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452,924,946,979 Robbinsdale Independent School Dist. 281; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . 1045 Roberson v. Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Roberson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Robert v. Ferreira . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Roberts v. Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Roberts; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Roberts; Marks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Roberts; Meshell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Roberts; Moore v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Roberts v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892,1019,1136 Robertson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Robertson-Ceco Corp. v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Robertson-Ceco Corp.; Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Robinette; Ohio v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Robinson v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Robinson v. Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Cuyahoga Cty. . . 997,1085 Robinson v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935,1035 Robinson; Lloyd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Robinson v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Robinson v. Shell Oil Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 Robinson v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Robinson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845,943,1070 Robinson v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Robles v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Roboserve, Inc. v. Kato Kagaku Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Rocha; Hayes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Rocha; Lugo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Rochester v. Reed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Rockaway Township Town Council; Fernandes v. . . . . . . . . . . . 824,1001 Rocking Horse Ridge Estates Assn.; Cherry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Rocky Mountain Conf. of United Methodist Church v. Winkler . . 1093 Rodgers v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Rodrigo Garcia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Rodriguez; Drennon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Rodriguez v. Edmondson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Rodriguez v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Rodriguez v. Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Rodriguez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826,856,860,1019,1034,1138 Rodriguez Macias v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Rodriquez v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Roe; Augustine v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Roe; Galloway v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Roe; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Roe v. Maskell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Roe; Reyes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Rogers; Cline v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Rogers v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Rogers; Loewe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Rogers v. Overstreet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Rogers v. Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816,1024 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxxiii Page Rogers; Sherrills v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Rogers; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Rogers v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999,1069,1134 Rogers v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Rohan v. American Bar Assn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Rojas v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953 Rojas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Roland v. McDonnell Douglas Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Rolfs; LaRue v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Rollins; Kyricopoulos v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Romano v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Romas-Miranda v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Romer v. Keane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Romero, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947 Romero v. Thompson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Romero v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Ronwin v. Altman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Rood v. Oldsmar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Roquemore v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Rosado v. Curtis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Rosch v. U. S. Parole Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Roscoe v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Rose v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 906 Roseboro v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Rosemeyer; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Rosen v. Board of Medical Examiners of Ariz. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053 Rosen v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Rosenbalm v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Roslyn Union Free School Dist. No. 3 v. Hsu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Ross v. Communication Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Ross v. Ieyoub . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Roston v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Roswell Lincoln Mercury, Inc.; Wilkerson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Rota v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Rothberg v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Rothenberg v. Ruzicka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Rotibi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Roulette v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Rowan; Simpson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Rowe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Rowell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Rowinsky v. Bryan Independent School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Rowland; Stephen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Rowsey v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Roy; California v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,1071 Roy; Mitchell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Royal v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Royster v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 R. R. Donnelley & Sons Co. v. Fuchs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021 Rubalcaba; Valles v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Rubin; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897,1024 Rubin; Patterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Rubio v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Rucker v. Citicorp Savings of Ill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818,1048 Rudd, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105 Rude v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058,1156 Ruff v. Armontrout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Ruff v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Ruffin v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Ruiz, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072 Ruiz v. Blentech Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Ruiz v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963,1073 Ruiz v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Ruiz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845,1155 Runnels v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1155 Runyan; Carr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Runyon; Baker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,1023 Runyon; Bowman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Runyon; Gate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Runyon; Hernandez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Runyon; Kulinski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890,904 Runyon; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Runyon; Page v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977 Runyon; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1022 Rupe; Wood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Rupert v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Rush Health Systems, Inc.; White v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Rushing v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Russell; Lane v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Russell v. Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Russell v. Strongsville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Russell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841,975,1070,1154 Russman; Board of Ed. of City School Dist. of Watervliet v. . . . . 1106 Russo v. Beyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984,1072 Russo v. Marut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Russo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Rust v. Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Rutherford v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxxv Page Ruthers v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Rux v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Ruzicka; Rothenberg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Ryan; James v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Ryan; Nebraska v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Ryckman v. Envirodyne Industries, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Rye Neck School Dist.; Immediato v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Saathoff v. FileNet Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Saathoff v. Whelan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Saavedra v. Korean Air Lines Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Sabelko v. Phoenix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Sacramento County District Attorney's Office; Davis v. . . . . . . . . 996 Sacramento County Sheriff's Dept.; Megrave v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Sadler v. Jabe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Saelee v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Safeco Ins. Co. of America, Inc.; Simmons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Sage v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Sahni v. American Diversified Investment Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Saif'Ullah v. Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Sai-Man v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 St. David's Episcopal Church; Westboro Baptist Church, Inc. v. . . 1090 St. Hilaire v. Maine Real Estate Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869,1023 St. Louis; Oxford House-C. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 St. Louis v. Texas Workers' Compensation Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . 912 St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins.; Hyland Hill North Condo. Assn. v. 1041 Saiz v. Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Sakaria v. Dare County Bd. of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976,1071 Salahuddin v. Coughlin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Salazar v. Morales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Salazar Gonzales v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Saleem v. Helman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Salemo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982,999 Salinas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Salinas v. University of Texas-Pan American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Sallee v. Sherakas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Sallee v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Sallee v. U. S. Parole Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 Salmon v. Branton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Salomon Forex, Inc.; Tauber v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977 Salter v. Richardson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1133 Salyer v. Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Sam v. Independence Savings Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Sammi Corp.; Metro Industries, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Samples v. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Samson Resources Co.; Maxwell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Samuel v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Sanchez v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Sanchez; Colorado v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1051 Sanchez v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Sanchez v. Santa Cruz County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Sanchez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878,1100 Sanchez v. Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Sanders v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Sanders v. Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Sanders v. Raytheon Engineers & Constructors, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . 925 Sanders; Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Sanders v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Sanders v. Venture Stores, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Sanders v. Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 San Diego County; Fully Informed Jury Assn. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 San Diego County Dept. of Social Services; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Sandles, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Sandoval v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Sandvoss, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946 Sanford; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 San Francisco; Golden Gate Hotel Assn. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 San Gorgonio Farms, Inc.; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 San Juan v. North Alamo Water Supply Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 San Mateo County; Wood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 San Pedro v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 Santa Clara Valley Humane Society; Hershey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Santa Cruz County; Sanchez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Santa Cruz County; Sorkin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. v. Moskowitz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Santana-Molina v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Santangelo v. Richardson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Santiago v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Santiago-Martinez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999 Santobello v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Santos v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Sapp v. Power Computing Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Sara Lee Corp.; Kayser-Roth Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Saranchak v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Sarasota County; Daugherty v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Saratoga Fishing Co. v. J. M. Martinac & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1027 Sather Trucking Corp.; Slathar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Saturn General Motors Corp.; Bowers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Saunders v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxxvii Page Savage v. District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902,988 Savage; Haygood v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Sawyer v. Dairy Queen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Sawyer v. Hickey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Sawyer v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836,837 Saxton; McDonald v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Sayco Ltd. v. Dalton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 S­B Power Tool; Price v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Scambos v. Petrie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Sceifers v. Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Schachner; Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Ohio v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Schacht; American Deposit Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870 Schafer; North Dakota Assn. of Retarded Citizens v. . . . . . . . . . . 993 Schaffer v. Kirkland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982,1049 Schall v. U. S. Postal Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868,1048 Schapiro v. Schapiro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931,1023 Schaumburg v. Amoco Oil Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Scheidemann v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . 803 Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western N. Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 Schiffer v. Tarrytown Boat Club, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864,1023 Schimenti, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Schledwitz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Schleeper v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Schley v. College of Charleston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Schlicher v. Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Schlicher v. Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Schmalbeck; Zielinski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Schmidt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Schneider v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Schneider; Cheatham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971,1072 Schneider v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1103 Schneider v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Schneider National Carriers, Inc. v. Pyatt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Schnidrig; Columbia Machine, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Schnuck Markets, Inc. v. Luecke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Schoenbohm v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Schonholz; Long Island Jewish Medical Center v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Schoor, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003 Schriro; Aziz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Schriro; Hamilton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Schueller v. Edgar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Schulte v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Schulte Roth & Zabel v. Southmark Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Schultz v. Consolidation Coal Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxxxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Schultz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Schulz v. Vernon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Schulze v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Schumer; Hughes Aircraft Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1088 Schumer v. Shalala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Schurz v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Schuver v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Schwab & Co.; Dahl v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Schwartz v. Doc's Food Stores, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Schwarz v. Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Schwegmann Giant Supermarkets, Inc.; Kambitsis v. . . . . . . . . . . 907 Scianna v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Sciarrino v. Key West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Scotland County Bd. of Ed.; Viswanathan v. . . . . . . . . . . . 925,1030,1143 Scotland Memorial Hospital; Patel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Scott, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946 Scott; Balawajder v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Scott; Boney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Scott; Christensen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Scott; Horton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Scott; Lopez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Scott v. Maass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Scott v. Manilla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Scott v. Recession Hearing Official . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Scott; Samples v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Scott v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971,1049 Scott v. Tansy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Scott v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1155 Scott; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 Scottish Heritable Trust, PLC v. Peat Marwick Main & Co. . . . . 869 Scotts African Union Methodist Protestant Church; Conference of African Union First Colored Methodist Protestant Church v. . . 1058 Scovish; Upjohn Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Scurlock v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Scypta v. Oglebay Norton Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Seagate Technology, Inc.; Doan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Seagate Technology, Inc.; Furr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Seagrave, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Seagrave v. Spindler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Sea Gull Lighting, Inc. v. Hydramatic Packing Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . 869 Sealaska Corp.; Broad v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Searcy; Curd v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Sears, Roebuck & Co.; DeJesus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Sears, Roebuck & Co.; Gerth v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxxxix Page Secretary of Agriculture; Levitoff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Secretary of Agriculture; Western Radio Services Co. v. . . . . . . . 822 Secretary of Air Force; Coyle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Secretary of Army; Askew v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Secretary of Army; Boulineau v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Secretary of Army; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Secretary of Army; Cowhig v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,1022 Secretary of Army; Drummond v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Secretary of Army; Goffer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052 Secretary of Army; Nouraie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838,1022 Secretary of Army; Uithoven v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Secretary of Defense; Altimus v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Secretary of Defense; DCX, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Secretary of Defense; Thomasson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Secretary of Defense; Waller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Secretary of Ed.; Messerschmidt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Secretary of Ed.; Pennsylvania v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 913 Secretary of HHS; Davon, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Secretary of HHS; Hervey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Secretary of HHS; Le May v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Secretary of HHS; Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Secretary of HHS; Schumer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Secretary of HHS; Templeton Coal Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Secretary of HHS; Young v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Secretary of Interior; Alaska v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Secretary of Interior v. Youpee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 Secretary of Labor; Acura of Bellevue v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Secretary of Labor; Bechtel Energy Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Secretary of Labor; G*UB*MK Constructors v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Secretary of Labor; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Secretary of Labor; Lopez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Secretary of Labor; Stangl v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Secretary of Navy; Becerra v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Secretary of Navy; Greenlaw v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Secretary of Navy; Hy Thi Nguyen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045,1143 Secretary of Navy; Sayco Ltd. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Secretary of Navy; Steward v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Secretary of State of Ark. v. Donovan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958 Secretary of State of Fla.; Biddulph v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1151 Secretary of Transportation of Kan.; Thiry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Secretary of Treasury; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897,1024 Secretary of Treasury; Lawrence v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803,1037 Secretary of Treasury; Patterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Secretary of Veterans Affairs; Arroyo Jusino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1048 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxl TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Secretary of Veterans Affairs; Ball v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Secretary of Veterans Affairs; Henderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 Secretary of Veterans Affairs; March v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 SEC; Law Practice of J. B. Grossman, P. A. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 SEC; Sprecher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Security Pacific Corp.; Dillard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Seddens v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1048 Seeger v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Seetharaman v. Commonwealth Edison Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Segines v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Segler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Seguin Independent School Dist.; Ganyo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Segura-Del Real v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Selby v. Abraham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Seniw v. Portanova . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Senkowski; Bacchi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Senkowski; Dean v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Senkowski; Martinez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 Separation of Church and State Committee; Am. Legion Post No. 3 v. 1038 Sepe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 Sepulvado v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1035 Serito v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Serot v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Serrano v. Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Serrano v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Sertich v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932,1113 Service Employees v. Foundation Industries, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Service Lloyds Ins. Co.; Gallego v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Sessions; Owes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Sessoms v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Sewell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843,1018 Seymour v. New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 SGS Importers International, Inc.; Para-Ordnance Mfg., Inc. v. . . 822 Shabazz v. Artuz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Shabazz v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Shalala; Davon, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Shalala; Hervey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Shalala; Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Shalala; Schumer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Shalala; Templeton Coal Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Shalala; Young v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Shanahan; Zuill v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Shanks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Shannon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxli Page Share International, Inc.; Department of Revenue of Fla. v. . . . . 1056 Sharp v. Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Sharp v. Myers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Sharrieff v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Shaw v. Hunt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804 Shaw v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Shaw Agency v. Morstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Sheahan; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Sheehy, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Sheet Metal Workers v. Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n 945 Sheet Metal Workers; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Sheffield v. Andrews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Shell Oil Co.; Robinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 Shelly v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Shelton; Church of Lord Jesus Christ of Apostolic Faith v. . . . . . 869 Shelton v. Gudmanson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883,1072 Shelton v. Lensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Shelton v. Looker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937,1049 Sheppard v. Riverview Nursing Centre, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Sheppard Air Force Base; Brooks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Sherakas; Sallee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Sherbondy v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Sherman; Henry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Sherman v. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Shern v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Sherrills, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027 Sherrills v. Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Sherwood Medical Co.; Words v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Shilling v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Shillinger; Harvey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Shillinger; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936,1036 Shimp v. Keycorp Mortgage, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843 Shinault; Board of County Comm'rs of Cleveland County v. . . . . . 1078 Shoemaker v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805,991,1085 Shoemaker v. Carlos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Shoffeitt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Shong-Ching Tong v. Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Shoobs v. Zaveletta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Shop Television Network, Inc.; Chodos v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Shores v. Rhoades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Shores v. Stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Short v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Shown v. Spears . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Shrestha v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxlii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Shrock v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Shults; Furtick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Shumate v. NationsBank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871,1035 Siegel v. Doe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830,1024 Sierra v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Sierra Club; Texas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Sierra Club, Lone Star Chapter; Cedar Point Oil Co. v. . . . . . . . . 811 Siers v. Butterworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Sikes; Banks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Silva-Diaz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070 Silver, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923,1026 Silvers v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Simmons v. Bienvenu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Simmons v. Burns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Simmons v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Simmons v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894,932,1020 Simmons v. Vacaville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Simmons v. Wetherall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Simms v. First Madison Bank, FSB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041,1143 Simms v. Harrison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Simms v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Simon, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Simon v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Simonet; Mitchell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Simply Fresh Fruit, Inc. v. Continental Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Simpson v. Cepak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Simpson; Fortescue v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857,1023 Simpson v. Freeman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Simpson v. Hession . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Simpson; Highland Irrigation Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Simpson v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Simpson v. Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Simpson v. Rowan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Simpson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975,1019 Sims v. Ault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Sims v. Brown & Root Industrial Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Sims v. Bunnell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Sims v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902,1017 Singer; Patel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Singer; Washington v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Singla v. Department of Health and Human Services . . . . . . . . 970,1072 Singletary; Andrade v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Singletary; Buenoano v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Singletary; Bush v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxliii Page Singletary; Campbell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Singletary; Castro v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Singletary; Cave v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Singletary; Cooper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Singletary; Frederick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Singletary; Gadson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884,1035 Singletary; Glock v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888,1044,1076 Singletary; Goss v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Singletary v. Gwong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1051,1142 Singletary; Irving v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Singletary; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Singletary; Knapp v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Singletary; Lambrix v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958,1005 Singletary; Magnotti v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Singletary; Marek v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Singletary; McDonald v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Singletary; Nicholson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Singletary; Payne v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Singletary; Peterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Singletary; Reed v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Singletary; Scott v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971,1049 Singletary; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Singletary; VanDerBerg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Singletary; Vickson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Singletary; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887,1031,1143 Singleton v. Christ the Servant Evangelical Lutheran Church . . . 870 Singleton v. Guangzhou Ocean Shipping Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Singleton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Sinicropi; Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Sinisterra v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Sirois v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe, Lake Traverse Res. v. United States 1011 Sitkoff v. BMW of North America, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Skeen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Skeet v. New York City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Skil Corp.; Price v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Skott v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Skrzypczak v. Kauger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Slappy v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Slappy v. Vanmeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014,1102 Slater v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873,909 Slathar v. Sather Trucking Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Slaton v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Slinkard; Ameritas Investment Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxliv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page S. L. J.; M. L. B. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Sloan v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Slone v. Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Sluder v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Small v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Small v. Perrill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Smallwood v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Smallwood v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980 SmileCare Dental Group v. Delta Dental Plan of Cal., Inc. . . . . . . 1028 Smith, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871,948,988,1035 Smith v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Smith v. Banks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Smith v. Becker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Smith v. Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Smith v. Denver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010,1101 Smith v. Englewood Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 884 Smith v. Gomez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938,969 Smith v. Grace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Smith; Holtz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 Smith v. Houston Oilers, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008 Smith; Hughes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Smith v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Smith v. Keane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Smith; Kilaab al Ghashiyah (Khan) v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Smith v. Louisiana-Pacific Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982,1072 Smith v. Mail-Well Envelope Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994,1085 Smith v. National Corp. of Housing Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . 859,1023 Smith v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Smith v. Office of Civilian Health and Medical Program of Uni- formed Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Smith v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Smith v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Smith v. Puckett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Smith v. Regional Transportation Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021,1102 Smith v. Runyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1022 Smith v. Sheet Metal Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Smith; Sherman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Smith v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Smith; Stavrakas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Smith v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Smith v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848, 856,867,880,938,943,999,1018,1020,1070,1082,1119,1133,1137, 1141 Smith v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxlv Page Smith; Wambaugh v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Smith v. Warnick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Smith; Wilkerson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Smith Barney Shearson; J. Geils Band Employee Ben. Plan v. 823 Smith Corp.; Klehr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1073 SmithKline Beecham Corp.; Lynnbrook Farms v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Smotkin, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005,1146 SMS Financial, L. L. C.; Ragland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Snipes v. DeTella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Snow v. Halford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 Snyder; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Snyder v. Viani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Sobocinski v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Sobol; Garnett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Sobolevitch; Medico v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Soca; Florida v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Society Hill Savings and Loan Assn.; Rashid v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Sockwell v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Soffer v. Board of Trustees of City Univ. of N. Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Soignier v. American Bd. of Plastic Surgery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Sokolow v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Solano Camacho v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Solis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Solloso; Castillo Reyes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Somani; Downhour v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Sonoma County Water Agency; United States ex rel. Hagood v. . . 865,1001 Sorbet v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1102 Sorensen v. Mahoney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Sorenson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941 Sorkin v. Santa Cruz County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Sorton v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Sotelo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Soto v. Lebedeva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 South African Airways v. Brink's Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 South Bend Community School Corp; Helland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 South Carolina; Green v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 South Carolina; Haynes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939,1102 South Carolina; McWee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061 South Carolina; Miller v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 South Carolina; Patrick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 South Carolina; Register v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 South Carolina; Robinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 South Carolina; Slappy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxlvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page South Carolina; Von Dohlen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 South Carolina; Whipple v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 South Carolina; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891,969 South Carolina; Williamson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 South Carolina Bd. of Comm'rs of Judicial Standards; Brown v. . . 1116 South Dakota; Chance Management, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 South Dakota; Department of Interior v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 919 South Dakota; Rhines v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 South Division Credit Union v. McFarland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Southeastern Pa. Transportation Authority; Doe v. . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co.; Bankston v. . . . . . . . 891,1001 Southern Pacific Transportation Co.; Ruiz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Southmark Corp.; Schulte Roth & Zabel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.; Fent v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Southwest Travis County Road Dist. No. 1; Becker v. . . . . . . . 933,1024 Souvannarath v. Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Sowa; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1143 Spaight v. Goord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Spang & Co. v. Brytus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 Spann, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 946 Sparkman; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Sparkman; Long v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833,842,987 Sparks v. Stutler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Sparks v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 876 Spaulding v. Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Spear, Leeds & Kellogg v. Central Life Assurance Co. . . . . . . . . 1040 Spears v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Spears; Shown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063 Special School Dist. No. 1 v. H. M. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Speight v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Speight v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Spence v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Spencer v. LeMay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Spencer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943,1066 Spencer v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Sperling v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Spiegel v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865,1143 Spindler; Seagrave v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Spires v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Spiva v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Spivey v. Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Sporting Club Acquisitions, Ltd. v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . 810 Spradling; Tulsa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Spratt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxlvii Page Sprecher v. Securities and Exchange Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Spring v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Spring Meadows Apt. Complex Ltd. Partnership v. Stallings . . . 824 Sprosty v. Buchler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Sprouse; Bane v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Spurgetis v. U. S. Judiciary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1035 Square Nursing Home, Inc.; Wing v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Sriyuth v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Stabile v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Stadler v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1064 Stainer; Milner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Stallings v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Stallings; Spring Meadows Apt. Complex Ltd. Partnership v. . . . 824 Stallworth; Evergreen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Stambaugh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Standard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Standard Mortgage Co.; Reyes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Stanewich's Estate; Van Ort v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Stangl v. Reich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Stanhope Hotel; Buzea v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854,1102 Stanley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Stanley Bostitch Co.; Lawal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Stanton v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Stanton v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Stanton v. Witkowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Staples v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Stark; Kenney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Stark & Stark; Ardell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Starr v. Metzer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Starzenski v. Elkhart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028,1055 State. See also name of State. State Bar of Cal.; Light v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 State Bar of Cal.; Wolfgram v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 State Bar of Ga.; Bishop v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.; Finney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.; Spiegel v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865,1143 State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.; Lexie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 State Oil Co. v. Khan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Stattin v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807 Staude v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Staula v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 Staup v. First Union National Bank of Fla. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894,1024 Stavrakas v. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 Stearman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cxlviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Stedman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Steele v. California Dept. of Social Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952,1036 Steele v. Han Chul Choi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897 Steele v. Los Angeles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016,1143 Steffen, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Steichen & Co.; Honn v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Stepanik; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Stepanik; Hand v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Stepanik; Hanson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Stepanik; Pagan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Stephans v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973 Stephen v. Prunty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Stephen v. Rowland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Stephens; Harvin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Stepp v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Steptoe & Johnson; Burford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Stevens v. McGinnis, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Stevens; McGinnis, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Stevens v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Stevens v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 Steward v. Dalton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Steward v. Hofstetter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Stewart; Bartholic v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121,1153 Stewart v. Gramley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838,1022 Stewart; Greenawalt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1102,1103 Stewart; Henderson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Stewart; KHD Deutz of America Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Stewart; Martinez-Villareal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Stewart v. Texas Bd. of Pardons and Paroles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Stewart v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Stiffarm v. Burlington Northern R. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Stiles, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006,1089 Stiltner v. Beretta U. S. A. Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Stinson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Stitt v. CNG Transmission Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Stjernholm v. Peterson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Stock; Camilo Montoya v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846 Stock; Felder v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 897,1035 Stock; Killingsworth v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Stock; Shores v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Stoianoff v. TRW, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063,1156 Stokes v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Stoller v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 957 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cxlix Page Stone v. Farley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Stone v. Los Angeles County Dept. of Children & Family Servs. 936 Stone Co.; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Stone Container Corp.; Gaston v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Stonehill v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992 Storer v. Ocean City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 Storey v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Story; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Story v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Stout v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1036 Stover v. O'Connell & Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983 Stowe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Strate v. A­1 Contractors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 Straub v. Zollar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Streetsboro; Ward v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Strickland v. Gridley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Strickland v. Linahan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 Strickland v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Strickland v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Stringfellow v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Strobridge v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825,1022 Stroman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Strong v. Glendening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079 Strongsville; Russell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Strother v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Strothers v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Struve v. Park Place Apartments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Stuart; DiCesare v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Studer Revox America, Inc.; Nordahl v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 823 Studio Art Theatre of Evansville, Inc. v. Evansville . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Stulz v. U. S. Parole Comm'n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Stupak-Thrall v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Sturgis, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105 Sturm, Ruger & Co. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Stutler; Sparks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Styles v. VanZandt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Suarez Corp. Industries v. West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Suarez-Riascos v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Subaru of America, Inc. v. Compton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042,1143 Suehl v. Suehl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818,1022 Suffolk Univ. Law School; Hoover v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836 Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1088 Sule v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 Su Lee v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cl TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Sullivan v. Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Sullivan; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Sullivan v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Summers v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Summerville; Haynes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Sumrall v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1117 SunAmerica Corp. v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada . . . . . . . 822 Sunbeam Corp.; Kime E. Laube Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Sunbeam Corp.; Laube v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.; Oncale v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 Sunenblick v. Harrell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada; SunAmerica Corp. v. . . . . . . . 822 Superintendent of penal or correctional institution. See name or title of superintendent. Superior Court of Cal., Kern County; KGET­TV Channel 17 v. 1008 Superior Court of Cal., Los Angeles County; Cardan v. . . . . . . . . 888 Superior Court of Cal., Los Angeles County; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . 1153 Superior Court of Cal., Los Angeles County; Lin v. . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Superior Court of Cal., Los Angeles County; Tassa v. . . . . . . . . . 1113 Superior Court of Cal., Santa Clara County; Lockmiller v. . . . . 929,1035 Superior Form Builders; Dan Chase Taxidermy Supply Co. v. 809 Supreme Court of Ill.; Jacobs v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Supreme Court of Tex.; Wightman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Sutton v. Kernan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Swaim, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802 Swain v. District Court of Appeal of Fla., Third Dist. . . . . . . . . . 851 Sweatt v. Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Sweed v. Texas Bd. of Criminal Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Sweeney v. National Transportation Safety Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Swest, Inc.; Ash v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Swest, Inc.; Lipton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Swift v. Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division 806 Swift v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Swiftships, Inc. v. Loral Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Swigert; Waterfield v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Swisher v. Texas State Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Swoyer v. Edgars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Swoyer v. Kercher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Swoyer v. Merchant Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Swoyer v. Reed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Systems Fuel, Inc. v. Alexander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Syverson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982 Szenay v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Szymanski v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cli Page Taco Bell Corp.; Okparaocha v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Taffer, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026,1146 Tafuto v. New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Tahoe Regional Planning Agency; Suitum v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926,1088 Taite v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Takacs, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105 Takahashi v. Livingston Union School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Talamantes, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1089 Tamayo, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Tamayo Baron v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Tamminga; Jackson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Tansy; Gillette v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Tansy; Scott v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Taos Municipal Schools; Trujillo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Tapar v. Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Tarrytown Boat Club, Inc.; Schiffer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864,1023 Tart v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1035 Tassa v. Ger-Dan International Telecom, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Tassa v. Superior Court of Cal., Los Angeles County . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Tate v. Glenn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910 Tauber; Ginberg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Tauber v. Salomon Forex, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977 Tavares v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955,1139 Tax Comm'r of Ohio; General Motors Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278,962 Tax Comm'r of W. Va.; Hartley Marine Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Taxman; Piscataway Township Bd. of Ed. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1089 Taylor v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Taylor v. Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860,1023 Taylor v. McLennan Community College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Taylor v. Meacham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Taylor v. Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994,1085 Taylor v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Taylor v. Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Taylor v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888,901,1000,1093,1141 Taylor Construction Co. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1056 Tchoder v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Teague v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Team Bank; Kuhns v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Technicolor, Inc.; Liquidation Estate of De Laurentiis Entertain- ment Group v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Teel v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Teets v. Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR clii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Tele-Communications, Inc.; Reynolds v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849,1001 Teleconcepts, Inc. v. MCI Telecommunications Corp. . . . . . . . . . . 815 Tellier v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Telxon Corp.; McAllister v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Temple v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855,883 Templeton Coal Co. v. Shalala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Temple Univ.; Yuan Jin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013,1102 Tennessee; Caldwell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853 Tennessee; Cone v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 Tennessee; Hines v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Tennessee; Jefferson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Tennessee; Joyner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Tennessee; Vincent v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Tennessee; Walker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Tennessee Bd. of Regents; Huston v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Terrell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Terrilynne Coal Co. v. Director, OWCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Terry; Boblett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Tesciuba v. Koch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952,1049 Teta; McCarthy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Texas; Altschul v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065,1066 Texas; Booth v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Texas; Brimage v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838 Texas; Brosky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Texas; Broussard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Texas; Caldwell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859 Texas; Cannady v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Texas; Carillo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Texas; Carter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Texas; Citizen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Texas; Cox v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Texas; Dillingham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879 Texas; Flores v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 Texas; Gaines v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Texas; Gonzaba v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Texas; Hampton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Texas; Heiden v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Texas; January v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Texas; Lawton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Texas; Luckette v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Texas; Mantz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Texas; Martin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082 Texas; Matyastik v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815,1072 Texas; McBride v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED cliii Page Texas; McCoskey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Texas; McFarland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1119 Texas; Morgan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Texas v. New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803,979 Texas; O'Brien v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Texas; Picone v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Texas; Rachal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803,1043 Texas; Ransom v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Texas; Rees v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Texas v. Sierra Club . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Texas; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Texas; Summers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Texas; Taylor v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Texas Bd. of Criminal Justice; Sweed v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Texas Bd. of Pardons and Parole; Altschul v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Texas Bd. of Pardons and Paroles; Stewart v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Texas Commerce Bank; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, Institutional Div.; McCullough v. 832 Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, Institutional Div.; Swift v. . . . . . 806 Texas State Bar; Swisher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Texas Workers' Compensation Comm'n; St. Louis v. . . . . . . . . . . 912 Thigpen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 967 Thimm v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Thi Nguyen v. Dalton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045,1143 Thiry v. Carlson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Thoeny; Pletz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Thomas v. Adams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Thomas v. Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Thomas v. American Home Products, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 913 Thomas; Banks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Thomas v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Thomas v. Deaconess Hospital, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Thomas v. Evans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Thomas v. Georgia State Bd. of Pardons and Paroles . . . . . . . . . . 851 Thomas; Lasiter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Thomas; Muraski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Thomas v. Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Thomas v. Sanders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Thomas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,975,985,986,1045 Thomasson v. Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 Thompsen v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Thompson, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Thompson v. BIC Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Thompson; Costa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR cliv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Thompson v. Crabtree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Thompson; Harrison v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Thompson v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067,1080 Thompson v. Kramer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Thompson; Murray v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 Thompson v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration . . . 864 Thompson; Romero v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Thompson v. Thompson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851,1044 Thompson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883,967 Thompson v. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Thorne v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Thornton v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 Thoubborn; Grune v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Throckmorton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1132 Throgmorton; Walton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Throneburg v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Thurman; Bowen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Thurman; Cobb v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Tiday v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Tidik v. Tidik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Tidwell v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Tierney v. Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901,988 Tierney v. Peterson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984,1072 Tilton v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Tinch v. Dayton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Tinsley v. Indianapolis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 Tirico v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 Tisor v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1140 Tlaga v. Reno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Tobias v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Tobias v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Tobias v. Young . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Todd v. Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 Toepeaka v. Department of Treasury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Toerper v. Trotter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Tokar v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Tokarevich v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904 Toledo; Emery v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Toler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 Tomasin, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962 Tomberlin; Boyett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Tommie Ray's; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Tompkins; Boone v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians v. Poodry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED clv Page Tong v. Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Tonnelle Ave. Books & Video, Inc. v. North Bergen . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Toombs; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Toro v. Depository Trust Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Torres v. Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Torres v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890 Torres Serrano v. Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Toshiba America Medical Systems, Inc. v. OEC Medical Systems 808 Tovar v. IBP, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Towery v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Town. See name of town. Town Justice of Walworth; Pringle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Townsend v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 Toys "R" Us, Inc.; Denbicare U. S. A., Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Tracy; General Motors Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278,962 Trail Mountain Coal Co. v. Utah Div., State Lands and Forestry 1142 Transamerica Financial Consumer Discount Co.; Hinchliffe v. . . 818,1022 Trans World Airlines; Colligan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Trans World Airlines, Inc.; Dean v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Sinicropi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Trapp v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Trautman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Travis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Traylor v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Treadway; Cox v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821 Treiber v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Trident Seafoods Corp. v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Trim v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 Trinh Hinh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 Trinidad v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Tripati, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Tripati v. Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Tristar Corp. v. Freitas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 Tropicana Products; Cooper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062 Trostel; American Life & Casualty Ins. Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1104 Trotter; Toerper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Troutwine Family Trust v. Nevada County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Truck Drivers v. Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Truesdale v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Trujillo v. Taos Municipal Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 TRW, Inc.; Stoianoff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063,1156 Tseng v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Tseng Fu Lin v. Goldsboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Tsimbidaros v. Painters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR clvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Tsosie v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Tucker v. Coggins/Continental Granite Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Tucker v. Department of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Tucker; Greene v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Tucker v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Tucker Bey v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Tuggle v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894,1024 Tulsa v. Spradling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Tumlin v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Turentine v. Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Turk; Lu v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Turner v. Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Turner v. Couch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Turner; Helton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Turner v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Turner v. Internal Revenue Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1049 Turner v. Investek Financial Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Turner v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Turner v. Kuykendall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996,1049 Turner; Magoon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Turner v. Merit Systems Protection Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985,1049 Turner v. Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Turner; PFS Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814 Turner; Shong-Ching Tong v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Turner v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034,1084 Turpin; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Turpin; Einhorn Yaffee Prescott Architecture & Engineering v. 929 Turpin; Felker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 988,989 Turpin; Lonchar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 988 Tyler v. Ashcroft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 Tyler v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Tyler v. Carnahan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833,876 Tynes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 UAL Corp.; Fry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987 UAP/GA AG Chem., Inc. v. Childree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148 Ubel v. Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1057 Udall; Wilson Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Uithoven v. West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Ulczycki v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Umar v. McVea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Under Seal v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841 Underwater Construction Corp.; Rizzi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Underwood v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100,1130 Unigard Security Ins. Co. v. Bock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED clvii Page Union. For labor union, see name of trade. Union Employee Discretionary Trust; Kauble v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Union Oil Co. of Cal. v. Citizens for a Better Environment-Cal. . . 1101 Union Pacific R. Co.; CMC Heartland Partners v. . . . . . . . . . . . 805,1090 Union Underwear Co. v. Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Unison Transformer Services, Inc.; Allen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871 Unisys Corp. v. Meinhardt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810 United. For labor union, see name of trade. United Arab Emirates; MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. . . . . . . 1007 United Capital Corp.; Fischer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125,1131 United Farmers Agents Assn., Inc., v. Farmers Ins. Exchange . . 1116 United Homes for Children; Pigott v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 United Parcel Service, Inc.; Gentry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 United Savings Bank; Abdallah v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 United States. See name of other party. U. S. Bureau of Prisons; Duarte v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891 U. S. Court of Appeals; Bast v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 U. S. Court of Appeals; Conkle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 811 U. S. District Court; Arteaga v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097,1157 U. S. District Court; Campbell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943,1036 U. S. District Court; Foti v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 U. S. District Court; Harper v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858,1023 U. S. District Court; Howard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 U. S. District Court; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1072 U. S. District Court; Kelley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 U. S. District Court; Martin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 U. S. District Court; Montgomery v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 U. S. District Court; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 U. S. District Court; Strickland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 U. S. District Court; Wagner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 U. S. District Court; Walker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 U. S. District Court; Zakiya v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 U. S. District Court; Zulu X v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 U. S. District Judge; Fischer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 U. S. District Judge v. Governor of Ill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962,1111 U. S. District Judge; Greer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 U. S. District Judge; Hall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 U. S. District Judge; Hook v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 959 U. S. District Judge; Perryman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 U. S. District Judge; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801 United States Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Co.; Buice's Estate v. . . . 863 U. S. Judiciary; Spurgetis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934,1035 U. S. Marshals Service; Amiri v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 U. S. Marshals Service; Foster v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:50] PGT*TCR clviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page U. S. Marshals Service; Monroe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1138 U. S. Parole Comm'n; Rosch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 U. S. Parole Comm'n; Sallee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 986 U. S. Parole Comm'n; Stulz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 U. S. Postal Service; Bell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 U. S. Postal Service; Hasan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 U. S. Postal Service; Schall v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868,1048 U. S. Postal Service; Whitney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 United States Trustee; Fukutomi v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 University of Cal.; Voytek v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 University of Md. at Baltimore; Hampton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 University of S. C.; Murrell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835,1071 University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston; Lakoski v. . . 947,1035 University of Texas-Pan American; Salinas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 Unsecured Creditors Committee; Prince v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Upjohn Co. v. Scovish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Uptown Records v. Harrell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Ureta v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Uribe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Urichich v. Youngstown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928,1101 USAir, Inc., In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 Utah; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Utah; Whiting v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844,1001 Utah Div., State Lands and Forestry; Trail Mountain Coal Co. v. 1142 Vacaville; Simmons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Vacco v. Quill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 Valder v. Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820 Valdes, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Valdez; Jordan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Valdez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907,1136 Valdez-Anguiano v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Valencia, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039 Valencia Romero v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Valenzuela Ramirez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Valles v. Rubalcaba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Valliere v. Maine Workers' Compensation Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Valmet Oy v. Aldy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 817 Vander Ark; Chapman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Vanderbeck v. Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 VanDerBerg v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Van Doren v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Van Hoorelbeke v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985,1072 Vanmeter; Slappy v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014,1102 Vann v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED clix Page Vann v. Oklahoma Dept. of Human Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Vann v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Van Ort v. Stanewich's Estate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Van Poyck v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912 VanZandt; Styles v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Varallo v. Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Vargas v. Keane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Vargas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Varner v. National Super Markets, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Varner; National Super Markets, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110 Vasquez; Forrest v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 Vasquez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Vaughan v. Dormire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Vaughn; Allah v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985 Vaughn; Larry v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Vaughn v. Ohio Medical Bd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923,965 Vaughn; White v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Vaughters v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Veale v. New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Vebeliunas v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Vega v. Rexene Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 Vega v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Vega-Fleites v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Velez v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1126 Velez v. Puerto Rico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067,1157 Venable v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977,1027 Vencil v. Quigley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Veneklase v. Fargo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Veneri v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Venson v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Venture Stores, Inc.; Sanders v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Verbeck v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Verex Assurance, Inc. v. Palma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048 Vermont; Sanders v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Vernon; Schulz v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Ver Strate; Di Lauro v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Vest v. Commissioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Vey, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805,962 Vey v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Viani; Snyder v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 Vick v. Foote, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Vick v. Foote Tire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Vickson v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Victor v. Hopkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR clx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Vigilante v. Irvin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Village. See name of village. Villager Pond, Inc. v. Darien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808 Villaloz v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Vincent v. Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Vines v. Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Virani v. Hall & Phillips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Virginia; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Virginia v. Browner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Virginia; Clagett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Virginia; Goins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887 Virginia; Harris v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Virginia; Husske v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1154 Virginia; Lowery v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930 Virginia; Luzik v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Virginia; Martin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852 Virginia; Muhammad v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Virginia; Novak v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006 Virginia; Rhoton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968 Virginia; Roach v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Virginia; Robinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1153 Virginia; Royal v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Virginia; Rushing v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Virginia; Sloan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 Virginia; Stanton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Virginia; Wanzer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Virginia; Warren v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Virginia; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998,1085 Virginia Dept. of Corrections; Wagner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Virgin Islands; Weatherwax v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Visintine, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Vision Cable of Pinellas, Inc.; Kramer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993 Visiting Nurse Assn. of North Shore, Inc. v. Bullen . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Viswanathan v. Scotland County Bd. of Ed. . . . . . . . . . . . 925,1030,1143 Vivas-Garcia v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Viviano Wine Importers, Inc. v. Brown-Forman Beverage Co. . . . 1078 Viviano Wine Importers, Inc. v. Brown-Forman Corp. . . . . . . . . . 1078 Vocelle; Waterfield v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Vogt v. Churchill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Voigt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047 Vominh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1118 Von Dohlen v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 V­1 Oil Co. v. Idaho Petroleum Clean Water Trust Fund . . . . . . . 1009 Vose; Heon v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED clxi Page Vose; Hightower v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 Voss v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889,1033 Voytek v. University of Cal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Vrba v. Wakatsuki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Wabash Valley Power Assn., Inc.; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . 965 Wacker v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848 Wade, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 Wade v. Byles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935 Wadley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Wages v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Wagner v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888 Wagner v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1099 Wagner v. Virginia Dept. of Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Wagstaff; Reiman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Wainwright, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1073 Wainwright v. Huckabee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072 Wainwright v. Norris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968,1073 Waite v. Hippe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Wakatsuki; Vrba v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996 Wake County v. Edward Valves, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Waldrop, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1073 Waldrop v. Hopper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Walgreen Co.; Oiness v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112 Walkenbach v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1083 Walker; Bronson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062,1067 Walker; Maddox v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014 Walker v. Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Walker; Moates v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015 Walker v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Walker v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Walker v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Walker v. Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Walker v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 904,944,1046,1138,1139 Walker v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Walker v. Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Wall v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059 Wallace v. Morrison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Wallace v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 888,977 Waller v. Kentucky Bar Assn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Waller v. Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991 Walls v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Walsh; Glendora v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122 Walters v. Allstate Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1022 Walters; Bierley v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843,1102 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR clxii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Walters v. Metropolitan Ed. Enterprises, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Walters v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Walters v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Walton; Abate v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026 Walton; Luna v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Walton v. Office of Personnel Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 881 Walton v. Throgmorton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Walton v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Wambaugh v. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Wanambisi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1135 Wanzer v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031 Ward; Booker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Ward v. Chater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 Ward v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019 Ward v. Streetsboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1092 Ward v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900,1019 Warden. See name of warden. Warfield; Holman Warfield v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812 Warnick; Smith v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Warr Acres; Pickett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Warren v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831,1022 Warren v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907 Warren Management Consultants, Inc.; Baba v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 840,1022 Warwick Mall Trust v. Rhode Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Washington, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926 Washington; Ford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Washington v. Glucksberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1027,1039,1075 Washington; Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 Washington; McKinney v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005 Washington v. Singer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 Washington v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Washington; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth.; Hancock Electronics Corp. v. 929 Washington Post; Whitehead v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Washington Times Corp. v. Berman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 Waszak v. Pasadena City College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Waterfield v. Swigert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Waterfield v. Vocelle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 Waterman v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Waters; Cohen v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Waters; Hargis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901 Waters v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 890,905 Waters; Walker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 905 Watkins v. Parker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED clxiii Page Watkins v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908,938,1000 Watson v. General Motors Corp., Electro-Motive Division . . . . . . 842 Watson v. Isern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042 Watson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Watts; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148,1144 Waugh v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Wauseon; Plassman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Wayne v. Benson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Weatherwax v. Government of Virgin Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 Weaver v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Weaver v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Weaver v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100,1132 Weaver v. Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Webb v. Citicorp Credit Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 Webb v. Pulitzer Publishing Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805 Webb v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148,1156 Webber v. Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090 Weber v. Erickson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 Webster; Omnitrition International, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865 Weekley v. Gammon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Weekley; Garza v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950,1048 Weeks v. Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Weible v. Doctor's Associates, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Weisman, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105 Weiss v. Moreno Valley Unified High School Dist. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029 Weiss v. Weiss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 Weiters v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Welky v. Makowski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Weller v. Citation Oil & Gas Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055 Wellington v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955 Wellons v. Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Wells v. Gomez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Wells v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Wells v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Wells; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 Wells v. Zent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Welz v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 929 Wesley, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1147 Wesley v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1085 Wesley v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994 Wesley v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1082,1132 Wess v. Revell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 West; Askew v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 West; Boulineau v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR clxiv TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page West; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040 West; Cowhig v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,1022 West; Drummond v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 West; Goffer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052 West; Nouraie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838,1022 West; Uithoven v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 West v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976 Westboro Baptist Church, Inc. v. St. David's Episcopal Church . . 1090 Westbrooks v. Court of Common Pleas of Pa., Allegheny County 889 Westcott v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908 Western Radio Services Co. v. Glickman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Westhaven Village v. Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Westley v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1094 West Virginia; McKenzie v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 West Virginia; Suarez Corp. Industries v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 966 West Virginia; Woody v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Wetherall; Simmons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Wexler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033 Weyerhaeuser Co.; United States v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Whaley v. Oregon Bd. of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision . . . 898 Wheat Ridge; McAlister v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Wheeler v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861,905,1128 Whelan; Saathoff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 Whipple v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045 Whitaker v. Whitaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 924 White, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806 White v. Adams County Detention Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 White; Baticados v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 White; Botello Cervantes v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 815 White; Carl v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 White; Domino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 White; Farr v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1127 White v. Gregory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 White v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911,1065 White; McNabb v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 831 White; Moats v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 880 White v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 White v. Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 832 White; Owens v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 White; Rogers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874 White v. Rush Health Systems, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1007 White; Spencer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 934 White; Strother v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 White; Thompson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 889 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED clxv Page White v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845,1011,1070 White v. Vaughn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 White Foods; Kelly Foods Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Whitehead, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Whitehead v. Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1030 Whitehead v. Washington Post . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Whitfield v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Whiting v. Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844,1001 Whitney v. U. S. Postal Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938 Whitworth v. Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931 Wichita; Kramer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 962 Wichita; Ramirez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872 Widnall; Coyle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937 Wightman v. Supreme Court of Tex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Wild v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Wilentz; Kirchgessner v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1108 Wiley v. General Motors Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Wilkerson v. Norgaard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Wilkerson v. Roswell Lincoln Mercury, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 950 Wilkerson v. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Wilkinson v. Legal Services Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Wilkinson & Monaghan v. Hillcrest Healthcare Corp. . . . . . . . . . . 861 Willbanks v. Keck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981 Wille; Plescher v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093 Willett; Ray v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 822 Williams, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806,962,1023 Williams v. Cain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080 Williams v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895,1045 Williams v. Caspari . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 Williams; Connolly v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840 Williams v. Cousin-Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Williams v. Ferguson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1044 Williams v. Fountain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Williams v. Hofbauer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 Williams v. Horner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Williams v. Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842 Williams v. Jackson Stone Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Williams v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Williams v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998 Williams v. Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829 Williams v. Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828,1071 Williams v. Los Angeles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088 Williams; Lyons v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Williams v. McCausland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR clxvi TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Williams v. Metropolitan Transit Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035 Williams v. Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974 Williams v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Williams v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Williams v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Williams v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1061,1156 Williams v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835 Williams v. Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854 Williams v. Parke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Williams; Peterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Williams v. San Gorgonio Farms, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Williams v. Singletary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 887,1031,1143 Williams v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891,969 Williams v. Toombs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Williams v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869, 887,900,902,940,967,1029,1068,1119,1130,1131,1133,1135 Williams v. Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998,1085 Williams v. Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081 Williams; Weaver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Williams v. Wright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Williams-Davis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Williams, Inc.; Blanchard v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 Williams Natural Gas Co. v. Kansas Pipeline Partnership . . . . . . 1092 Williamson v. South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Williamson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 Willis v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909,1034,1120 Willmes v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Wills v. Andrews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Wills v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000 Wilmoth v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899 Wilshire Terrace Corp.; Pierson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 994,1085 Wilson v. Began . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Wilson v. Bowers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1064 Wilson; CSX Transportation, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 Wilson; Hoff v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 878 Wilson v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Wilson v. Lane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 Wilson; Maryland v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408,804 Wilson v. Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Wilson v. McCloud . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970 Wilson v. Netherland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016 Wilson v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Wilson v. Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Wilson v. Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED clxvii Page Wilson v. Prunty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883 Wilson; Saif'Ullah v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Wilson; Truck Drivers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041 Wilson; Union Underwear Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1149 Wilson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806,943,998,1011,1107,1140 Wilson Corp. v. Udall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964 Wimberly v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Windley v. Dover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Windmill Corp.; Kelly Foods Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928 Windsor; Amchem Products, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 957,1054,1075,1103 Wing; Bernys v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Wing v. James Square Nursing Home, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Winkler, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054 Winkler; Rocky Mountain Conf. of United Methodist Church v. . . 1093 Winkler GMBH & Co. KG; Ferguson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Winnicki v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Winske; Coffey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Winslow v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 Wisconsin; Berndt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Wisconsin; Mack v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Wisconsin; Marsh v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856 Wisconsin; Martinez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 932 Wisconsin v. Mueller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1144 Wisconsin; Patterson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Wisconsin; Richards v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052,1106 Wisconsin Bd. of Attorneys Pro. Responsibility; Harvey v. . . . . . 824 Wisconsin Dept. of Health and Social Services; Nierengarten v. 932 Wisconsin Dept. of Revenue; Hogan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819 Wisconsin State Bar; Crosetto v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1116 Wise; Akbar-El v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834 Wishnatsky v. Bergquist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895,1024 Witchell, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105 Witherspoon v. Beshears . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Witherspoon v. Bibbings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Withrow v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Witkowski; Prechtl v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 Witkowski; Stanton v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 893 Witt; Banks v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Witte v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1120 Wittman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Wittmer v. Peters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111 Wofford v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826 Wogenstahl v. Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895 Wolf v. Buss America, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866,1023 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR clxviii TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Wolfe; Pringle v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Wolfe v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100 Wolfgram v. State Bar of Cal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1129 Womack; New Jersey v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011 Womack v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1156 Womble v. North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Wonderland Greyhound Park, Inc.; Davis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Wood; Dent v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1097 Wood v. Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 Wood; Oliver v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1131 Wood; Rice v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 873 Wood; Richardson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1098 Wood; Rivers v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095 Wood v. Rupe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1142 Wood v. San Mateo County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868 Woodall v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Woodard; Brewington v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860 Woodard v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 Woodfolk v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 975 Woodner Co. v. Breeden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1148,1149 Woodrup v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Woods; Burnett v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969 Woods v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854,996 Woods; Krueger v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 856,1023 Woodson v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 Woody v. West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 Wooten v. Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Word v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 Words v. Sherwood Medical Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013 Workers' Compensation Appeals Bd.; Sorbet v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 983,1102 Workmen's Compensation Appeal Bd. of Pa.; Banko v. . . . . . . . . . 885 Workmen's Compensation Appeal Bd. of Pa.; Morgart v. . . . . . . . 936 Workmen's Compensation Appeal Bd. of Pa.; Moschgat v. . . . . . . 1017 Wrenn v. Freeman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1136 Wright v. Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058 Wright; Gonzales v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847 Wright v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844 Wright v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895,1084,1135 Wright; Williams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933 Wronke v. Canady . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1096 Wronke v. Madigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017,1143 WSB Electric, Inc. v. Curry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1109 Wudtke v. Childers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861 Wuerl; Croatian Roman Catholic Cong., Holy Trinity Church v. 1114 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR TABLE OF CASES REPORTED clxix Page Wuornos v. Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 968,997 Wutthidetgrainggrai v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017 W. W. Henry Co.; Guilbeau v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Wyatt; Haas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Wyatt v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060 Wynne v. Wynne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Wyoming; Nebraska v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038 Wyoming; Rissler & McMurry Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1091 Wyoming; Sanchez v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984 Wyshak v. American Savings Bank, F. A. . . . . . . . . . . 866,950,1023,1035 Wzorek v. Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067 Yahweh v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Yang v. Immigration and Naturalization Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . 824 Yang; Immigration and Naturalization Service v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,1085 Yarber; Illinois v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1150 Yawczak v. Acosta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1009 Yepez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078 Yett v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1141 Yil Jo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Yin v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1114 Yohn v. Board of Regents, Univ. of Mich. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 York v. Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1152 York v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065 Young, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1076 Young; Abraham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944 Young; Brown v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 Young; El Jabaar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 833 Young v. Fordice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 991,1027,1039 Young; Freeman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121 Young v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855 Young v. Lowe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942 Young v. Shalala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1124 Young; Tobias v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952 Young v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 851,855,1135 YoungBear, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107 Young & Rubicam Inc.; Abrahams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 Youngstown; Urichich v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928,1101 Young Yil Jo v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137 Younis Bros. & Co. v. CIGNA Worldwide Ins. Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077 Yount v. Love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1130 Youpee; Babbitt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 Yourman; Guiliani v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1145 Ysassi v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1066 Yuan Jin v. Temple Univ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013,1102 Job: 519REP Unit: $U12 [05-13-99 15:06:51] PGT*TCR clxx TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page Yueh-Shaio Yang; Immigration and Naturalization Service v. . . . 26,1085 Yulee v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898 Yurtis v. Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,1023 Yusuff v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1134 Zakiya v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018 Zant; Parker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1043 Zantop International Airlines, Inc. v. Michigan Dept. of Treasury 1118 Zaveletta; Shoobs v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1123 Zavesky v. Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 828 Zayid v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128 Zdun v. California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 Zehnder; Brown's Furniture, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 866 Zeitvogel, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1036 Zeitvogel v. Bowersox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 953,1036 Zellmer v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069 Zent; Wells v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882 Zervakos; Michael v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 875 Zielinski v. Schmalbeck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863 Zientek v. New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 Zimmer v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. of Mich. . . . . . . 910 Zolin; Campbell v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125 Zollar; Straub v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032 Zschach; Johnson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028 Zucco v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 Zucker v. Quasha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825 Zuckerman v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1139 Zuill v. Shanahan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1190 Zulu X v. U. S. District Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858 zu Mike v. Reno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 Zuniga Hernandez v. United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902 519us1$$1Z 04-30-98 13:30:30 PAGES OPINPGT CASES ADJUDGED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AT OCTOBER TERM, 1996 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE, BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS, et al. v. LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR VIETNAMESE ASYLUM SEEKERS, INC., et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit No. 95­1521. Argued October 15, 1996-Decided October 21, 1996 45 F. 3d 469 and 74 F. 3d 1308, vacated and remanded. Deputy Solicitor General Kneedler argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Acting Solicitor General Dellinger, Assistant Attorney General Hunger, Paul R. Q. Wolfson, Michael Jay Singer, and Robert M. Loeb. Daniel Wolf argued the cause for respondents. With him on the briefs were William R. Stein and Robert B. Jobe. Per Curiam. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit for further consideration in light of § 633 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (enacted as Division C of the Omnibus Consolidated Ap- propriations Act, 1997, Pub. L. 104­208, 110 Stat. 3009­701). 1 519US1$$2Z 06-02-99 14:00:38 PAGES OPINPGT 2 OCTOBER TERM, 1996 Syllabus CALIFORNIA et al. v. ROY on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 95­2025. Decided November 4, 1996 A California court convicted respondent Roy of robbery and first-degree murder. The State contended that Roy, coming to the aid of a confeder- ate who was committing the robbery, helped with the murder. The jury was instructed that it could convict if, inter alia, Roy, with knowledge of the confederate's unlawful purpose, had helped the confederate. The State Supreme Court later held an identical instruction erroneous be- cause it did not require the jury to find that a defendant had the knowl- edge and intent or purpose of committing, encouraging, or facilitating the confederate's crime. Despite this error, the State Court of Appeal affirmed Roy's conviction, finding that the error was "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt." See Chapman v. California, 386 U. S. 18, 24. The Federal District Court considering Roy's habeas claim also found the error harmless, reasoning that no rational juror could have found that Roy knew the confederate's purpose and helped him but also did not intend to help him. In reversing, the en banc Ninth Circuit applied a special harmless-error standard, which it believed combined aspects of the decisions in Carella v. California, 491 U. S. 263 (per curiam), and O'Neal v. McAninch, 513 U. S. 432, and held that the omission of the instruction's intent part is harmless only if a review of the assistance and knowledge facts found by the jury establish that the jury necessar- ily found the omitted intent element. Held: As a federal court reviewing a state-court determination in a ha- beas corpus proceeding, the Ninth Circuit should have applied the harmless-error standard first enunciated in Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U. S. 750, namely, whether the error had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict. The Ninth Circuit drew its standard from a discussion in Carella's concurring opinion about the proper way to determine whether an error in respect to the use of a legal presumption was harmless. Subsequent to Carella, how- ever, this Court held in Brecht v. Abramson, 507 U. S. 619, and O'Neal, supra, that a federal court reviewing a habeas proceeding ordinarily should apply the Kotteakos standard. That standard applies to habeas review of trial errors, including errors in respect to which the Constitu- tion requires state courts to apply a stricter, Chapman-type harmless- error standard when reviewing a conviction directly. The sort of error 519US1$$2Z 06-02-99 14:00:38 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 2 (1996) 3 Per Curiam at issue in Carella is a trial error subject to harmless-error analysis. The error at issue here-a misdescription of an element of the crime- is an error of omission, not an error of the structural sort that defies harmless-error analysis. Certiorari granted; 81 F. 3d 863, vacated and remanded. Per Curiam. A California court convicted respondent Kenneth Roy of the robbery and first-degree murder of Archie Mannix. The State's theory, insofar as is relevant here, was that Roy, com- ing to the aid of a confederate who was trying to rob Mannix, helped the confederate kill Mannix. The trial judge gave the jury an instruction that permitted it to convict Roy of first-degree murder as long as it concluded that (among other things) Roy, "with knowledge of" the confederate's "unlawful purpose" (robbery), had helped the confederate, i. e., had "aid[ed]," "promote[d]," "encourage[d]," or "instigate[d]" by "act or advice . . . the commission of" the confederate's crime. The California Supreme Court later held in People v. Bee- man, 35 Cal. 3d 547, 561, 674 P. 2d 1318, 1326 (1984), that an identical instruction was erroneous because of what it did not say, namely, that state law also required the jury to find that Roy had the "knowledge [and] intent or purpose of com- mitting, encouraging, or facilitating" the confederate's crime. Id., at 561, 674 P. 2d, at 1326 (emphasis added). Despite this error, the California Court of Appeal affirmed Roy's con- viction because it found the error "harmless beyond a rea- sonable doubt." See Chapman v. California, 386 U. S. 18, 24 (1967). The California Supreme Court denied postconvic- tion relief. Subsequently Roy, pointing to the same instructional error, asked a Federal District Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus. The District Court denied the request because, in its view, the error was harmless. Indeed, the District Court wrote that no rational juror could have found that Roy knew the confederate's purpose and helped him but also found that Roy did not intend to help him. A divided 519US1$$2q 06-02-99 14:00:38 PAGES OPINPGT 4 CALIFORNIA v. ROY Per Curiam Ninth Circuit panel affirmed. Roy v. Gomez, 55 F. 3d 1483 (1995). The Ninth Circuit later heard the case en banc and re- versed the District Court. It held that the instructional error was not harmless. 81 F. 3d 863 (1996). In doing so, the majority applied a special "harmless error" standard, which it believed combined aspects of our decisions in Ca- rella v. California, 491 U. S. 263 (1989) (per curiam), and O'Neal v. McAninch, 513 U. S. 432 (1995). The Ninth Cir- cuit described the standard as follows: "[T]he omission is harmless only if review of the facts found by the jury establishes that the jury necessarily found the omitted element." 81 F. 3d, at 867 (emphasis in original). As we understand that statement in context, it meant: "[T]he omission [of the `intent' part of the instruction] is harmless only if review of the facts found by the jury [namely, assistance and knowledge] establishes that the jury necessarily found the omitted element [namely, `in- tent']." Ibid. The State of California, seeking certiorari, argues that this definition of "harmless error" is far too strict and that this Court's decisions require application of a significantly less strict "harmless error" standard in cases on collateral review. See Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U. S. 619 (1993); O'Neal, supra. We believe that the State, and the dissenting judges in the Ninth Circuit, are correct about the proper standard. The Ninth Circuit majority drew its special standard primarily from a concurring opinion in Carella, supra, a case that dealt with legal presumptions. The concurrence in that case set out the views of several Justices about the proper way to determine whether an error in respect to the use of a pre- sumption was "harmless." Subsequent to Carella, however, this Court held that a federal court reviewing a state-court 519US1$$2q 06-02-99 14:00:38 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 2 (1996) 5 Per Curiam determination in a habeas corpus proceeding ordinarily should apply the "harmless error" standard that the Court had previously enunciated in Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U. S. 750 (1946), namely, "whether the error `had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict.' " Brecht, supra, at 637 (citing Kotteakos, supra, at 776). The Court recognized that the Kotteakos standard did not apply to " `structural defects in the constitution of the trial mechanism, which defy analysis by "harmless-error" standards,' " 507 U. S., at 629, but held that the Kotteakos standard did apply to habeas review of what the Court called "trial errors," including errors in respect to which the Con- stitution requires state courts to apply a stricter, Chapman- type standard of "harmless error" when they review a con- viction directly. 507 U. S., at 638. In O'Neal, supra, this Court added that where a judge, in a habeas proceeding, applying this standard of harmless error, "is in grave doubt as to the harmlessness of an error," the habeas "petitioner must win." Id., at 437. The case before us is a case for application of the "harm- less error" standard as enunciated in Brecht and O'Neal. This Court has written that "constitutional error" of the sort at issue in Carella is a "trial error," not a "structural error," and that it is subject to "harmless error" analysis. Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U. S. 279, 306­307 (1991). The state courts in this case applied harmless-error analysis of the strict variety, and they found the error "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt." Chapman, supra, at 24. The specific error at issue here-an error in the instruction that defined the crime-is, as the Ninth Circuit itself recognized, as easily characterized as a "misdescription of an element" of the crime, as it is characterized as an error of "omission." 81 F. 3d, at 867, n. 4. No one claims that the error at issue here is of the "structural" sort that " `def[ies] analysis by "harmless error" standards.' " Brecht, supra, at 629. The analysis advanced by the Ninth Circuit, while certainly con- 519US1$$2q 06-02-99 14:00:38 PAGES OPINPGT 6 CALIFORNIA v. ROY Scalia, J., concurring sistent with the concurring opinion in Carella, does not, in our view, overcome the holding of Brecht, followed in O'Neal, that for reasons related to the special function of habeas courts, those courts must review such error (error that may require strict review of the Chapman-type on direct appeal) under the Kotteakos standard. Thus, we are convinced that the "harmless error" standards enunciated in Brecht and O'Neal should apply to the "trial error" before us as enun- ciated in those opinions and without the Ninth Circuit's modification. For these reasons, we grant respondent's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari, vacate the Ninth Circuit's determination, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. Justice Scalia, with whom Justice Ginsburg joins as to Part I, concurring. I I agree with what the Court decides in its per curiam opinion: that the Brecht-O'Neal standard for reversal of the conviction ("grave doubt as to the harmlessness of the error"), see Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U. S. 619 (1993), and O'Neal v. McAninch, 513 U. S. 432 (1995), rather than the more stringent Chapman standard (inability to find the error "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"), see Chapman v. California, 386 U. S. 18 (1967), applies to the error in this case when it is presented, not on direct appeal, but as grounds for habeas corpus relief. The Ninth Circuit did not apply that more deferential standard, and I therefore concur in the remand. I do not understand the opinion, however, to address the question of what constitutes the harmlessness to which this more deferential standard is applied-and on that point the Ninth Circuit was quite correct. As we held in Sullivan 519US1$$2q 06-02-99 14:00:38 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 2 (1996) 7 Scalia, J., concurring v. Louisiana, 508 U. S. 275 (1993), a criminal defendant is constitutionally entitled to a jury verdict that he is guilty of the crime, and absent such a verdict the conviction must be reversed, "no matter how inescapable the findings to support that verdict might be." Id., at 279. A jury verdict that he is guilty of the crime means, of course, a verdict that he is guilty of each necessary element of the crime. United States v. Gaudin, 515 U. S. 506, 522­523 (1995). Formally, at least, such a verdict did not exist here: The jury was never asked to determine that Roy had the "intent or purpose of committing, encouraging, or facilitating" his confederate's crime. People v. Beeman, 35 Cal. 3d 547, 561, 674 P. 2d 1318, 1326 (1984). The absence of a formal verdict on this point cannot be rendered harmless by the fact that, given the evidence, no reasonable jury would have found otherwise. To allow the error to be cured in that fashion would be to dispense with trial by jury. "The Sixth Amendment requires more than appellate speculation about a hypothetical jury's action, or else directed verdicts for the State would be sustainable on appeal; it requires an actual jury finding of guilty." Sulli- van, supra, at 280. The error in the present case can be harmless only if the jury verdict on other points effectively embraces this one or if it is impossible, upon the evidence, to have found what the verdict did find without finding this point as well. See Carella v. California, 491 U. S. 263, 271 (1989) (Scalia, J., concurring). I concur in the remand so that the Ninth Circuit may determine whether there is "grave doubt" that this is so, rather than (what it did) deter- mine whether it is impossible to "be certain" that this is so, 81 F. 3d 863, 867 (1996). Elsewhere in its opinion, the Ninth Circuit purported to be applying the O'Neal standard, stat- ing that "[w]hen the reviewing court is unable to conclude the jury necessarily found an element that was omitted from the instructions," it "can only be `in grave doubt as to the harmlessness of the error,' " 81 F. 3d, at 868 (quoting O'Neal 519US1$$2q 06-02-99 14:00:38 PAGES OPINPGT 8 CALIFORNIA v. ROY Scalia, J., concurring v. McAninch, supra, at 437). That seems to me to impart to the determination a black-and-white character which it does not possess, any more than other determinations pos- sess it. It can be "the better view," but far from "certain," that, given the facts in the record, no juror could find x with- out also finding y. What O'Neal means is that, when the point is arguable, the State's determination of harmless error must be sustained. II One final point: I write as I have written only because the Court has rejected the traditional view of habeas corpus relief as discretionary. See Withrow v. Williams, 507 U. S. 680, 720 (1993) (Scalia, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). But for that precedent, I would be content to grant federal habeas relief for this sort of state-court error only when there has been no opportunity to litigate it before, or when there is substantial doubt, on the facts, whether the defendant was guilty. See ibid. 519US1$$3Z 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT OCTOBER TERM, 1996 9 Syllabus LOPEZ et al. v. MONTEREY COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, et al. appeal from the united states district court for the northern district of california No. 95­1201. Argued October 8, 1996-Decided November 6, 1996 As a jurisdiction covered by § 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, appellee Monterey County (hereinafter County) must obtain federal preclear- ance-either from the Attorney General of the United States or from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia-of any voting practice different from its practices on November 1, 1968. On that date, the County had nine separate and independent inferior court districts, the judges of which were elected exclusively by their respec- tive districts' voters. Between 1972 and 1983, the County adopted six ordinances, which ultimately merged all the districts into a single, countywide municipal court served by judges whom County residents elected at large. This consolidation took place against a backdrop of California laws, some of which governed courts generally and others of which applied to the County's courts specifically. In 1991, appellants, Hispanic voters residing in the County, sued in the District Court, alleg- ing that the County had violated § 5 by failing to obtain federal preclear- ance of the consolidation ordinances. The three-judge District Court ordered the County to obtain federal preclearance of the challenged or- dinances. But the County did not submit the ordinances to the appro- priate federal authorities. Instead, the County began to work with ap- pellants to develop a new judicial election plan that they believed would be less retrogressive than the at-large, countywide election scheme. The State of California, as intervenor, opposed the parties' proposed plans. Ultimately, the District Court ordered the County to conduct judicial elections under an at-large, countywide election plan. In es- sence, four years after the filing of the complaint, the District Court ordered the County to hold elections under the very same scheme that appellants had originally challenged under § 5 as unprecleared. Held:1. This Court leaves to the District Court to resolve on remand appel- lee State's threshold contentions that, although the County perhaps should have submitted the consolidation ordinances for federal preclear- ance before implementing them, intervening changes in California law have transformed the County's judicial election scheme into a state plan, for which § 5 preclearance is not needed; that appellants' suit was barred 519US1$$3Z 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT 10 LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY Syllabus by laches; that it is constitutionally improper to designate the County a covered jurisdiction under § 5; and that the consolidation ordinances did not alter a voting "standard, practice, or procedure" subject to § 5 pre- clearance. Pp. 19­20. 2. The District Court's order that the County conduct elections under its unprecleared, at-large judicial election plan conflicts with Clark v. Roemer, 500 U. S. 646, 652­653, in which the Court held, among other things, that a voting change subject to § 5 is unenforceable unless pre- cleared and that § 5 plaintiffs are entitled to an injunction prohibiting implementation of an unprecleared change. Thus, an injunction is re- quired where, as here, a district court must decide whether to allow illegal elections to go forward. Id., at 654. There is no "extreme cir- cumstance" here that might justify allowing the 1996 elections to pro- ceed, cf. id., at 654­655, and the District Court has not independently crafted a remedial electoral plan such as might render the preclearance requirements inapplicable, see McDaniel v. Sanchez, 452 U. S. 130, 148­ 150. Nor is the preclearance process' basic nature changed by the com- plicating factors that a simple injunction could leave the County without a judicial election system because a return to the 1968 plan appears impractical, and that the parties seem unable to fashion a plan that does not contravene California law. Congress gave exclusive authority to pass on an election change's discriminatory effect or purpose to the fed- eral authorities designated in § 5. See id., at 151. On a complaint al- leging failure to preclear election changes under § 5, a three-judge dis- trict court may determine only whether § 5 covers a contested change, whether § 5's approval requirements were satisfied, and if the require- ments were not satisfied, what temporary remedy, if any, is appropriate. See City of Lockhart v. United States, 460 U. S. 125, 129, n. 3. The goal of a three-judge district court facing a § 5 challenge must be to ensure that the covered jurisdiction submits its election plan to the appropriate federal authorities for preclearance as expeditiously as possible. Here, by protracting this litigation in order to obtain a plan that complied both with § 5 and with state law, the District Court interposed itself into the § 5 approval process in a way that the statute does not contem- plate. Cf., e. g., Upham v. Seamon, 456 U. S. 37, 42­43 (per curiam). Pp. 20­25. Reversed and remanded. O'Connor, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Joaquin G. Avila argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs were Robert Rubin, Anthony Chavez, Antonia Herna´ndez, and Richard M. Pearl. 519US1$$3Z 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 9 (1996) 11 Opinion of the Court Alan Jenkins argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae urging reversal. With him on the briefs were Solicitor General Days, Assistant Attorney General Patrick, Deputy Solicitor General Bender, Steven H. Rosen- baum, and Eileen Penner. Daniel G. Stone, Deputy Attorney General of California, argued the cause for appellees. With him on the brief for state appellees were Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney Gen- eral, Floyd D. Shimomura, Senior Assistant Attorney Gen- eral, and Linda A. Cabatic, Supervising Deputy Attorney General.* Justice O'Connor delivered the opinion of the Court. This appeal presents a challenge to an order by a three- judge District Court for the Northern District of California that authorized Monterey County to conduct judicial elec- tions under an election plan that has not received federal approval pursuant to § 5 of the Voting Rights Act. I The State of California has 58 counties, one of which is Monterey County (hereinafter County). In 1971, the Attor- ney General designated the County a covered jurisdiction under § 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 79 Stat. 438, as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 1973b(b). 36 Fed. Reg. 5809 (1971); see 28 CFR pt. 51, App. (1995). As a result, the County became subject to the federal preclearance requirements set forth in § 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U. S. C. § 1973c. *Sidney S. Rosdeitcher, Paul C. Saunders, Norman Redlich, Barbara R. Arnwine, Thomas J. Henderson, Brenda Wright, Samuel L. Walters, Laughlin McDonald, Neil Bradley, Steven R. Shapiro, Elaine R. Jones, Norman J. Chachkin, and Jacqueline A. Berrien filed a brief for the American Civil Liberties Union et al. as amici curiae urging reversal. Sharon L. Browne and Deborah J. La Fetra filed a brief for the Pacific Legal Foundation as amicus curiae urging affirmance. Barbara McDowell and Elwood G. Lui filed a brief for the California Judges Association as amicus curiae. 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT 12 LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY Opinion of the Court Section 5 governs changes in voting procedures, with the purpose of preventing jurisdictions covered by its require- ments from enacting or seeking to administer voting changes that have a discriminatory purpose or effect. As a jurisdic- tion covered by § 5, Monterey County must obtain federal preclearance-either administrative or judicial-of any vot- ing practice different from the practices in effect on Novem- ber 1, 1968. To obtain administrative preclearance of a changed voting practice, a covered jurisdiction submits the enactment to the Attorney General of the United States. If the Attorney General does not formally object to the new procedure within 60 days of submission, the jurisdiction may enforce the legislation. A covered jurisdiction may also obtain judicial preclearance-either directly or after the Attorney General has objected to the voting change-by securing in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia a declaratory judgment that the new practice "does not have the purpose and will not have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color . . . ." Ibid. On November 1, 1968, the County had nine inferior court districts. Two of these districts were municipal court dis- tricts, each served by two judges, and the other seven were justice court districts, each served by a single judge. Both municipal and justice courts were trial courts of limited jurisdiction. Municipal courts served districts with popula- tions exceeding 40,000, and justice courts served those dis- tricts with smaller populations. The justice courts differed from the municipal courts in other respects. They were not courts of record and were served by judges who often worked part time and did not have to be members of the bar. Comment, Trial Court Consolidation in California, 21 UCLA L. Rev. 1081, 1086 (1974). (On January 1, 1990, however, a state constitutional amendment specified that all courts, including justice courts, were courts of record. Cal. Const., 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 9 (1996) 13 Opinion of the Court Art. VI, § 1 (1988). A few years later, California voters eliminated justice courts altogether. Art. VI, §§ 1, 5(b).) Each of the municipal and justice courts operated sep- arately and independently. Judges for each court were elected at large by the voters of their respective districts, and they served only the judicial district in which they were elected. The municipal and justice court districts varied widely in population and judicial workloads. For example, a 1972 survey showed that the Monterey-Carmel Municipal Court District had a population of 106,700, with more than enough work for two full-time judges. By contrast, the San Ardo Justice Court District had a population of 3,500, with a caseload that required less than a quarter of one judge's time. Between 1972 and 1983, the County adopted six or- dinances, which ultimately merged the seven justice court districts and the two municipal court districts into a single, countywide municipal court, served by nine judges whom County residents elected at large. (At present, 10 judges serve on the municipal court.) Each judge was elected to serve for a term of six years. Judicial elections were con- ducted under various interim schemes in 1974, 1976, 1978, and 1982. Additionally, the County conducted at-large, countywide judicial elections in 1986, 1988, and 1990. The County's reorganization of its inferior court system took place against a backdrop of state laws governing the general administration and organization of state courts. State law authorizes a county board of supervisors, "[a]s pub- lic convenience requires, . . . [to] divide the county into judi- cial districts for the purpose of electing judges . . . ." Cal. Govt. Code Ann. § 71040 (West 1976). The board also "may change district boundaries and create other districts." Ibid.; see also Cal. Govt. Code Ann. § 25200 (West 1988) ("The board of supervisors may divide the county into elec- tion . . . and other districts required by law, change their boundaries, and create other districts, as convenience re- 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT 14 LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY Opinion of the Court quires"). A county's judicial election scheme must comply with several state constitutional and statutory requirements. Municipal court districts must include at least 40,000 resi- dents, Cal. Const., Art. VI, § 5(a); cities may not be split into more than one judicial district, ibid.; Cal. Govt. Code Ann. § 71040 (West 1976); municipal court judges must be resi- dents of the judicial district to which they are elected or appointed, § 71140; and, according to the State, judges' juris- dictional and electoral bases must be coextensive, Cal. Const., Art. VI, § 16(b); Koski v. James, 47 Cal. App. 3d 349, 354, 120 Cal. Rptr. 754, 758 (1975). In addition to these generally applicable laws, the state legislature has enacted various pieces of legislation directed at the judicial systems of particular California counties, in- cluding laws aimed specifically at Monterey County's judicial system. Cal. Govt. Code Ann., Tit. 8, ch. 10 (West 1993). Some of these laws have reflected changes in the County's judicial districts resulting from the consolidation process.* The State has also enacted legislation dealing with the ad- ministration of the County's judicial system, such as appoint- *See, e. g., 1953 Cal. Stats., ch. 206, § 2 ("This article applies to the mu- nicipal court established in a district embracing the Cities of Carmel and Monterey"); 1975 Cal. Stats., ch. 966, § 2 ("This article applies only to mu- nicipal courts established in . . . [a] district embracing the Cities of Monte- rey, Carmel, Seaside, Sand City, and Del Rey Oaks designated as the Monterey-Carmel Judicial District; [and a] district embracing the City of Salinas designated as the Salinas Judicial District"); 1977 Cal. Stats., ch. 995, § 1 ("This article applies to all of the municipal courts established in the County of Monterey, which are in judicial districts entitled as follows: the Monterey Peninsula Judicial District, the Salinas Judicial District, and the North Monterey County Judicial District"); 1979 Cal. Stats., ch. 694, § 2 ("There is in the County of Monterey, on and after the effective date of this section, a single municipal court district which embraces the former Salinas Judicial District, Monterey Peninsula Judicial District and North Monterey County Judicial District"); 1989 Cal. Stats., ch. 608, § 1 (codified at Cal. Govt. Code Ann. § 73560 (West 1993)) ("This article applies to the Monterey County Municipal Court District, which encompasses the entire County of Monterey"). 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 9 (1996) 15 Opinion of the Court ment and compensation of court personnel. Cal. Govt. Code Ann. §§ 73564­73569 (West 1993). Although it was subject to § 5 preclearance requirements, the County did not submit any of the consolidation ordi- nances for federal preclearance under § 5. The State, how- ever, in 1983 submitted for administrative preclearance a state law, 1983 Cal. Stats., ch. 1249, that mentioned Monterey County's prospective consolidation of the last two justice court districts with the remaining municipal court district. The Department of Justice requested additional information concerning this aspect of the state legislation. In its re- sponse, the State included the last of the County's six consoli- dation ordinances, which was adopted in 1983. The Attor- ney General interposed no objection to the 1983 state law. The State's submission may well have served to preclear the 1983 county ordinance. See 28 CFR § 51.14(2) (1981); 28 CFR § 51.15(a) (1987). The United States points out, how- ever, that the 1983 submission to the Department of Justice did not identify or describe any of the County's previous con- solidation ordinances. The State does not contest this point. Thus, under our precedent, these previous consolidation ordi- nances do not appear to have received federal preclearance approval. Clark v. Roemer, 500 U. S. 646, 657­658 (1991); McCain v. Lybrand, 465 U. S. 236, 249 (1984). On September 6, 1991, appellants, five Hispanic voters re- siding in the County, sued the County in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, alleg- ing that the County had violated § 5 by failing to obtain federal preclearance of the six judicial district consolidation ordinances it had adopted between 1972 and 1983. They raised no claim under § 2 of the Voting Rights Act or consti- tutional challenge. A three-judge District Court was con- vened. On March 31, 1993, the District Court ruled that the challenged ordinances were election changes subject to § 5 and consequently unenforceable without federal preclear- ance. The District Court directed the County to submit the 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT 16 LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY Opinion of the Court ordinances to federal officials for preclearance. It also de- nied the County's motion to join the State as an indispensa- ble party under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19(b), find- ing that the State had no legally protected interest in the outcome of the action. In August 1993, the County filed a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking judicial preclearance of the challenged ordinances. Appellants intervened. But before that court made any findings, the County voluntarily dismissed its ac- tion, without prejudice. The County and appellants subse- quently stipulated that the County was " `unable to establish that the [consolidation ordinances] adopted by the County between 1968 and 1983 did not have the effect of denying the right to vote to Latinos in Monterey County due to the retrogressive effect several of these ordinances had on La- tino voting strength . . . .' " 871 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N. D. Cal. 1994). The parties thereupon returned to the three- judge District Court, and several years of litigation ensued. In essence, the County and appellants ceased to litigate the case as adversaries. Instead, they embarked on a joint attempt, opposed by the State and others as intervenors, to persuade the District Court to order a judicial election plan they viewed as less retrogressive than an at-large, county- wide election scheme. In late 1993 and early 1994, the County and appellants jointly proposed two plans to the Dis- trict Court. Each plan divided the County into different election areas, with judges from each area to serve on the countywide municipal court. The State objected to these schemes on the ground that they contravened California law, including the constitutional requirements that a judge's ju- risdictional and electoral bases be coextensive, Cal. Const., Art. VI, § 16(b), and that cities not be split into more than one judicial district, Art. VI, § 5(a). Appellants and the County acknowledged these conflicts, but asked the District 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 9 (1996) 17 Opinion of the Court Court to suspend operation of these state constitutional pro- visions in the County. For some time, the District Court was reluctant to imple- ment either of the proposed plans, ruling that it was "not satisfied that a plan necessarily ha[s] to conflict with [Article VI, § 16(b) in order to meet the requirements of] the Voting Rights Act." 871 F. Supp., at 1256. Finally, the County and appellants filed with the District Court a stipulation that the County could not " `devise or prepare any plan for the election of municipal court judges in Monterey County that [did] not conflict with at least one state law and still com- pl[ied] with the Voting Rights Act.' " Id., at 1257. The par- ties supported the stipulation with information on County demographics, the presence of politically cohesive Hispanic communities and Anglo bloc voting, and a legacy of discrimi- nation that had affected Hispanic citizens' right to vote. They also set forth a number of potential election plans that they believed complied with § 5, all of which violated some aspect of state law. In June 1994, the District Court decided to give appellants, the County, the State, and the United States, which had at this point weighed in as amicus curiae, another chance to develop a workable solution. It enjoined the upcoming 1994 elections. It directed the County to attempt to obtain changes in state law that would permit the implementation of a judicial election plan that complied with § 5 require- ments. It asked the State to assist the County in creat- ing an acceptable judicial election plan. Nevertheless, in late 1994, the parties were back in court, still without a satis- factory plan. The County had sought amendments to the State Constitution and statutes, but was unsuccessful. In a December 20, 1994, order, the District Court con- cluded that it had to devise a remedy that would permit judicial elections to take place, pending implementation of a permanent, federally precleared voting plan. Otherwise, voters would be deprived of their right to elect judges. The 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT 18 LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY Opinion of the Court District Court recognized that neither appellants nor the County thought feasible a return to the election scheme in effect on November 1, 1968. Instead, it decided to adopt one of the plans the County and appellants previously had proposed. Under this scheme, the County was divided into four election districts. Voters in three of the districts, in which Hispanics constituted a majority, would each elect one judge. Voters in the fourth district would elect the other seven judges. Judges elected under the plan would serve for 18-month terms, until January 1997. All 10 judges would serve on the countywide municipal court. The Dis- trict Court acknowledged that the interim plan was incon- sistent with state law, but reasoned that the intrusion on state interests was minimal. The County submitted the in- terim plan to the Attorney General for preclearance, and it was precleared on March 6, 1995. In a special election con- ducted on June 6, 1995, seven judges were elected. (Appar- ently, terms of three of the judges holding seats in the seven-member election district had not expired by June 1995.) Shortly after the June 1995 special election, this Court is- sued its decision in Miller v. Johnson, 515 U. S. 900 (1995), which prompted the three-judge District Court to reconsider the soundness of its interim election plan. Miller, ruled the District Court, cast "substantial doubt" on the constitu- tionality of its previous order, "as that plan used race as a significant factor in dividing the County into election areas." App. 167. Without ruling that the interim plan was in fact unconstitutional, the District Court decided to change course. It denied the County's request to extend the terms of judges elected in the 1995 special election, con- cerned that such an extension would be "inappropriate" in light of the possible constitutional infirmity of the interim plan. A return to the judicial election system in existence before the adoption of the consolidation ordinances was not "legal, feasible or desired." Ibid. In the District Court's 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 9 (1996) 19 Opinion of the Court view, its only option was to order the County to conduct an at-large, countywide judicial election in March 1996, while enjoining future elections pending preclearance of a perma- nent plan. Judges elected in 1996 would serve for the usual 6-year terms. The District Court also joined the State as an indispensable party, based on the State's argument that the County was doing nothing more than administering a state statute that required countywide elections, rather than administering its own county ordinance. Thus, in essence, four years after the filing of the complaint in this case, the District Court ordered the County to hold elections under the very same scheme that appellants originally challenged under § 5 as unprecleared. On January 22, 1996, appellants filed an emergency appli- cation in this Court to enjoin the 1996 elections pending ap- peal. We granted the application on February 1, 516 U. S. 1104 (1996), and noted probable jurisdiction on April 1, 517 U. S. 1118 (1996). II A Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act applies whenever a cov- ered jurisdiction "enact[s] or seek[s] to administer any . . . standard, practice, or procedure" different from that in force on the date of § 5 coverage. As a threshold matter, the State contends that, although the County perhaps should have sub- mitted the consolidation ordinances to federal authorities be- fore implementing them, intervening changes in California law have transformed the County's judicial election scheme into a state plan. Therefore, asserts the State, the County is not administering County consolidation ordinances in con- ducting municipal court elections, but is merely implement- ing California law, for which § 5 preclearance is not needed. The District Court was "not persuaded" by this argument, but ruled that the State could continue to seek to show that the County was merely administering California law. See 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT 20 LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY Opinion of the Court Cal. Govt. Code Ann. § 71040 (West 1976); see also Cal. Govt. Code Ann. § 25200 (West 1988). We leave this issue about the scope of § 5 to the District Court to resolve on remand. The State raises other threshold issues that the District Court did not have the opportunity to address. The State contends that appellants' suit was barred by laches; that it is constitutionally improper to designate the County a covered jurisdiction under § 5; and that the consolidation ordinances did not alter a voting "standard, practice, or procedure" sub- ject to § 5 preclearance. We express no view on these claims, leaving it to the District Court to decide them in the first instance. B A jurisdiction subject to § 5's requirements must obtain either judicial or administrative preclearance before imple- menting a voting change. No new voting practice is enforceable unless the covered jurisdiction has succeeded in obtaining preclearance. Clark v. Roemer, 500 U. S., at 652­653; McDaniel v. Sanchez, 452 U. S. 130, 137 (1981); Con- nor v. Waller, 421 U. S. 656 (1975) (per curiam). If a vot- ing change subject to § 5 has not been precleared, § 5 plain- tiffs are entitled to an injunction prohibiting implementation of the change. Clark v. Roemer, supra, at 652­653 (citing Allen v. State Bd. of Elections, 393 U. S. 544, 572 (1969)). The District Court's order that the County conduct elections under the unprecleared, at-large judicial election plan con- flicts with these principles and with our decision in Clark v. Roemer, supra. Clark concerned the propriety of a three-judge District Court's refusal to enjoin elections under an unprecleared Louisiana judicial election plan. There, Louisiana had not submitted for preclearance a number of statutory and consti- tutional voting changes relating to elections of state judges, many of which were adopted in the late 1960's and 1970's. Id., at 649. The District Court nonetheless permitted elec- tions to go forward, with the winners allowed to take office 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 9 (1996) 21 Opinion of the Court if Louisiana filed a judicial preclearance action within 90 days. Id., at 651. We held that the District Court erred in authorizing these elections in the absence of preclearance, pointing out that although Louisiana had been aware for at least three years that the judgeships were not precleared, it had still failed to file for judicial preclearance. Id., at 655. We acknowledged in Clark that earlier decisions such as Perkins v. Matthews, 400 U. S. 379 (1971), and Berry v. Doles, 438 U. S. 190 (1978) (per curiam), held that where a covered jurisdiction had already conducted elections under an unprecleared plan, it might be appropriate for the district court to afford local officials an opportunity to seek federal approval before ordering a new election. 500 U. S., at 654. But those cases raised an issue different from the one in Clark. In Perkins and Berry, the District Courts con- fronted the question whether to set aside illegal elections that had already taken place. By contrast, the District Court in Clark had to decide whether to allow illegal elec- tions to go forward in the first place. In this situation, "§ 5's prohibition against implementation of unprecleared changes required the District Court to enjoin the election." 500 U. S., at 654. The District Court faced fundamentally the same problem here as in Clark. The County did not preclear the ordi- nances as required by § 5. For several years, the County had been on notice that its electoral changes were subject to § 5's preclearance requirements, yet it never obtained judicial or administrative preclearance of the consolidation ordinances. In Clark, we left open the question whether a district court may ever deny a § 5 plaintiff's motion for an injunction and allow a covered jurisdiction to conduct an election under an unprecleared voting plan. We suggested that "[a]n extreme circumstance might be present if a seat's unprecleared status is not drawn to the attention of the [cov- ered jurisdiction] until the eve of the election and there are equitable principles that justify allowing the election to pro- 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT 22 LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY Opinion of the Court ceed." Id., at 654­655. We found no such exigency to exist in Clark, and we find none here. The State contends that there is a difference between a district court's failing to enjoin an unprecleared election scheme-the situation in Clark-and its ordering, pursu- ant to its equitable remedial authority, an election under an unprecleared plan. Regardless whether this distinction is meaningful, it does not advance the argument that the Coun- ty's judicial elections may be held without § 5 preclearance. We have recognized, at least in cases raising claims under the Fourteenth Amendment, that § 5 preclearance require- ments may not apply where a district court independently crafts a remedial electoral plan. McDaniel v. Sanchez, supra, 148­150 (quoting S. Rep. No. 94­295, pp. 18­19 (1975)). But where a court adopts a proposal "reflecting the policy choices . . . of the people [in a covered jurisdiction] . . . the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act is appli- cable." 452 U. S., at 153. The at-large, countywide system under which the District Court ordered the County to con- duct elections undoubtedly "reflect[ed] the policy choices" of the County; it was the same system that the County had adopted in the first place. It was, therefore, error for the District Court to order elections under that system be- fore it had been precleared by either the Attorney General or the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. We appreciate the predicament that the District Court faced. The County did not submit the consolidation ordi- nances for preclearance when they were adopted many years ago, and the District Court concluded that changes have oc- curred in the intervening years that make unrealistic a re- turn to the judicial election plan of 1968, now nearly 30 years old. Since there may be no practical way to go back to the 1968 plan, simply enjoining the elections would leave the County without a judicial election system. The County and appellants seem unable to fashion an election plan that does 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 9 (1996) 23 Opinion of the Court not contravene the California Constitution, and the State has vigorously opposed each of the parties' proposals as violative of state law. These complications do not, however, change the basic na- ture of the § 5 preclearance process. Congress designed the preclearance procedure "to forestall the danger that local de- cisions to modify voting practices will impair minority access to the electoral process." McDaniel, 452 U. S., at 149 (foot- note omitted). Congress chose to accomplish this purpose by giving exclusive authority to pass on the discriminatory effect or purpose of an election change to the Attorney Gen- eral and to the District Court for the District of Columbia. As we explained in McDaniel, "[b]ecause a large number of voting changes must necessarily undergo the preclearance process, centralized review enhances the likelihood that re- curring problems will be resolved in a consistent and expedi- tious way." Id., at 151 (footnote omitted). Once a covered jurisdiction has complied with these preclearance require- ments, § 5 provides no further remedy. Allen v. State Bd. of Elections, 393 U. S., at 549­550. This congressional choice in favor of specialized review necessarily constrains the role of the three-judge district court. On a complaint alleging failure to preclear election changes under § 5, that court lacks authority to consider the discriminatory purpose or nature of the changes. Perkins v. Matthews, supra, at 385 ("What is foreclosed to such dis- trict court is what Congress expressly reserved for consider- ation by the District Court for the District of Columbia or the Attorney General-the determination whether a covered change does or does not have the purpose or effect `of deny- ing or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color' "). The three-judge district court may determine only whether § 5 covers a contested change, whether § 5's ap- proval requirements were satisfied, and if the requirements were not satisfied, what temporary remedy, if any, is appro- priate. See City of Lockhart v. United States, 460 U. S. 125, 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT 24 LOPEZ v. MONTEREY COUNTY Opinion of the Court 129, n. 3 (1983); United States v. Board of Supervisors of Warren Cty., 429 U. S. 642, 645­647 (1977) (per curiam); Per- kins, supra, at 385; Allen, supra, at 558­559. The goal of a three-judge district court facing a § 5 challenge must be to ensure that the covered jurisdiction submits its election plan to the appropriate federal authorities for preclearance as ex- peditiously as possible. In this case, nearly five years after appellants brought their challenge, neither the Attorney General nor the District Court for the District of Columbia has yet made any findings regarding the retrogressive effect-or lack thereof-of the consolidation ordinances adopted between 1972 and 1983. The County dismissed its declaratory judg- ment action before the District Court for the District of Co- lumbia made any findings, and it has never submitted the consolidation ordinances to the Attorney General for review. Although the District Court initially ordered the County to obtain preclearance of the ordinances, when the County failed to follow through, the District Court did not enforce its order. The District Court itself holds some responsibility for pro- tracting this litigation. Because of its concern that the judi- cial election plans proposed by the County and appellants unnecessarily conflicted with California law, the District Court several times ordered the parties to submit to it an election plan that complied both with § 5's substantive re- quirements and with state law, before the County submitted the plan to federal officials. In so doing, it interposed itself into the § 5 approval process in a way that the statute does not contemplate. Cf. Upham v. Seamon, 456 U. S. 37, 42­43 (1982) (per curiam); United States v. Board of Supervisors of Warren Cty., supra, at 645­647; Perkins, 400 U. S., at 385. In their briefs, both parties raise detailed arguments regard- ing the effect of the consolidation ordinances on the County's minority voters, but § 5 requires either the Attorney General or the District Court for the District of Columbia to resolve 519US1$$3J 06-02-99 14:25:09 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 9 (1996) 25 Opinion of the Court in the first instance whether the consolidated municipal court system is retrogressive compared to the system existing in 1968. The County has not discharged its obligation to submit its voting changes to either of the forums designated by Con- gress. The requirement of federal scrutiny should be satis- fied without further delay. See Berry v. Doles, 438 U. S., at 192. The State appears willing to assist the County in pursuing the issue before either the Attorney General or the District Court for the District of Columbia, and its effort will doubtless be of assistance. The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. 519US1$$4Z 06-02-99 14:28:19 PAGES OPINPGT 26 OCTOBER TERM, 1996 Syllabus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE v. YUEH-SHAIO YANG certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 95­938. Argued October 15, 1996-Decided November 13, 1996 Respondent and his wife, former Taiwan residents, executed elaborate fraudulent schemes to gain entry to the United States and, later, to obtain citizenship for respondent. While respondent's naturalization application was pending, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) learned of his unlawful entry and issued an order to show cause why he should not be deported as excludable at the time of entry. He conceded that he was deportable and filed a request for a waiver of deportation under 8 U. S. C. § 1251(a)(1)(H). In affirming the Immigra- tion Judge's denial of this request, the Board of Immigration Appeals concluded that respondent was statutorily eligible for a waiver, but de- nied it as a matter of discretion. In vacating and remanding for further proceedings, the Ninth Circuit held that the Board abused its discretion by considering as adverse factors, first, respondent's participation in his wife's fraudulent entry and, second, his fraudulent naturalization appli- cation. The court reasoned that his acts in the former regard were "inextricably intertwined" with his own efforts to secure entry and must be considered part of the initial fraud, while his application must be considered an "extension" of that initial fraud. Held: In deciding whether to grant a waiver under § 1251(a)(1)(H), the Attorney General (or her delegate, the INS) may take into account acts of fraud committed by the alien in connection with his entry into the United States. The relevant statutory language establishes certain prerequisites to eligibility for a waiver, but imposes no limitations on the factors that the INS may consider in determining who, among the class of eligible aliens, should be granted relief. Cf., e. g., Jay v. Boyd, 351 U. S. 345, 354. Although it is the INS's settled policy to disregard entry fraud, no matter how egregious, in making the waiver determina- tion, that policy is the INS's own invention and is not required by the statutory text. Moreover, the INS has not abused its discretion by arbitrarily disregarding its policy here; it has merely taken a narrow view of what constitutes "entry fraud." It is assuredly rational, and therefore lawful, to distinguish aliens such as respondent who engage in a pattern of immigration fraud from aliens who commit a single, isolated act of misrepresentation. Pp. 29­32. 58 F. 3d 452, reversed. 519US1$$4Z 06-02-99 14:28:19 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 26 (1996) 27 Opinion of the Court Scalia, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Beth S. Brinkmann argued the cause for petitioner. With her on the briefs were Solicitor General Days, Acting Solic- itor General Dellinger, Assistant Attorney General Hunger, and Deputy Solicitor General Kneedler. Howard Hom argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Robert L. Reeves, Franklin W. Nelson, and Bill Ong Hing.* Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. This case presents the question whether the Attorney General, when deciding whether to grant a discretionary waiver of deportation under the applicable provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 95 Stat. 1616, as amended, 8 U. S. C. § 1251(a)(1)(H), may take into account acts of fraud committed by the alien in connection with his entry into the United States. Respondent Yueh-Shaio Yang and his wife, Hai-Hsia Yang, were born and married in the People's Republic of China, and subsequently moved to Taiwan. In order to gain entry to the United States, they executed the following scheme: After divorcing respondent in Taiwan, Hai-Hsia traveled to the United States in 1978 and, using $60,000 provided by respondent, obtained a fraudulent birth certificate and pass- port in the name of Mary Wong, a United States citizen. Respondent then remarried Hai-Hsia in Taiwan under her false identity and fraudulently obtained an immigrant visa to enter the United States as the spouse of a United States citizen. In 1982, four years after his fraudulent entry, re- spondent submitted an application for naturalization, which fraudulently stated that his wife "Mary" was a United States citizen by birth and that respondent had been lawfully ad- *Daniel J. Popeo and David A. Price filed a brief for the Washington Legal Foundation as amicus curiae urging reversal. Sandra E. Kupelian filed a brief for the American Immigration Law- yers Association et al. as amici curiae urging affirmance. 519US1$$4K 06-02-99 14:28:19 PAGES OPINPGT 28 INS v. YUEH-SHAIO YANG Opinion of the Court mitted for permanent residence. In 1985, while respond- ent's naturalization application was still pending, respondent and his wife obtained another divorce in order to permit her to obtain a visa under her true name (as the relative of a daughter who had obtained United States citizenship). The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) ulti- mately learned of respondent's unlawful entry, and in 1992 issued an order to show cause why he should not be deported. The INS maintained that respondent was de- portable under 8 U. S. C. § 1251(a)(1)(A), because he was ex- cludable from the United States at the time of entry under the former 8 U. S. C. §§ 1182(a)(14), (19), and (20) (1988 ed.). Respondent conceded that he was deportable and filed a re- quest for a waiver of deportation under § 1251(a)(1)(H). The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the Immigration Judge's denial of this request. The Board concluded that respondent was statutorily eligible for a waiver, but denied it as a matter of discretion. Although the Board did not consider respondent's fraudulent entry in 1978 as itself an adverse factor, it did consider, among other things, respond- ent's "acts of immigration fraud before and after his 1978 entry into the United States," App. to Pet. for Cert. 10a, including his first sham divorce to facilitate his wife's unlaw- ful entry, his 1982 application for naturalization, and his sec- ond sham divorce to assist his wife in obtaining an immigrant visa under her real name. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted re- spondent's petition for review, vacated the Board's decision, and remanded the case for further proceedings. Yang v. INS, 58 F. 3d 452 (1995). The Ninth Circuit held that the Board abused its discretion by considering as an adverse fac- tor respondent's participation in his wife's fraudulent entry, because those acts were "inextricably intertwined with Mr. Yang's own efforts to secure entry into the country and must be considered part of the initial fraud." Id., at 453. The Ninth Circuit also concluded that the Board improperly 519US1$$4K 06-02-99 14:28:19 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 26 (1996) 29 Opinion of the Court considered respondent's fraudulent application for natural- ization as an adverse factor because that application "must be considered an extension of the initial fraud." Ibid. We granted certiorari. 516 U. S. 1110 (1996).1 Section 1251(a)(1)(H) provides, in relevant part, as follows: "The provisions of this paragraph relating to the deportation of aliens within the United States on the ground that they were excludable at the time of entry as aliens described in section 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) of this title [who have obtained a visa, documentation, entry or INA benefit by fraud or misrepresentation] . . . may, in the discretion of the Attorney General, be waived for any alien . . . who- "(i) is the spouse, parent, son, or daughter of a citizen of the United States or of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence; and "(ii) was in possession of an immigrant visa or equiv- alent document and was otherwise admissible to the United States at the time of such entry except for those grounds of inadmissibility specified under paragraphs (5)(A) and (7)(A) of section 1182(a) of this title [relating to possession of valid labor certifications, immigrant visas and entry documents] which were a direct result of that fraud or misrepresentation." 2 1 Our jurisdiction over this matter is not in question. See 5 U. S. C. § 702. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRA), Div. C., Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1997, Pub. L. 104­208, 110 Stat. 3009, provides that "[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, no court shall have jurisdiction to review . . . any . . . decision or action of the Attorney General the authority for which is speci- fied under [Title 8 U. S. C.] to be in the discretion of the Attorney General . . . ." IIRA § 306(a). That provision does not take effect, however, until April 1, 1997. See IIRA §§ 306(c)(1), 309(a) (as amended by Pub. L. 104­ 302, § 2, 110 Stat. 3656). 2 The last clause of the quoted provision is less than artfully drawn, since the phrase "that fraud or misrepresentation" has no apparent antecedent. The antecedent was unmistakable in the prior version of the provision, 519US1$$4K 06-02-99 14:28:19 PAGES OPINPGT 30 INS v. YUEH-SHAIO YANG Opinion of the Court The meaning of this language is clear. While it establishes certain prerequisites to eligibility for a waiver of depor- tation, it imposes no limitations on the factors that the At- torney General (or her delegate, the INS, see 8 CFR § 2.1 (1996)) may consider in determining who, among the class of eligible aliens, should be granted relief. We have described the Attorney General's suspension of deportation under a re- lated and similarly phrased provision of the INA as " `an act of grace' " which is accorded pursuant to her "unfettered dis- cretion," Jay v. Boyd, 351 U. S. 345, 354 (1956) (quoting Escoe v. Zerbst, 295 U. S. 490, 492 (1935)), and have quoted approv- ingly Judge Learned Hand's likening of that provision to " `a judge's power to suspend the execution of a sentence, or the President's to pardon a convict,' " 351 U. S., at 354, n. 16 (quoting United States ex rel. Kaloudis v. Shaughnessy, 180 F. 2d 489, 491 (CA2 1950)). Respondent contends, however, that the portion of § 1251(a)(1)(H)(ii) requiring the alien to be "otherwise admis- sible"-that is, not excludable on some ground other than the entry fraud-precludes the Attorney General from consider- ing the alien's fraudulent entry at all. The text will not bear such a reading. Unlike the prior version of the waiver-of- deportation statute at issue in INS v. Errico, 385 U. S. 214 (1966), under which the Attorney General had no discretion to deny a waiver if the statutory requirements were met, satisfaction of the requirements under § 1251(a)(1)(H), includ- which, in its prologue, authorized waiver of deportation "on the ground that [the aliens] were excludable at the time of entry as aliens who have sought to procure or have procured visas or other documentation, or entry into the United States, by fraud or misrepresentation." 8 U. S. C. § 1251(f) (1988 ed.). In the prologue of the current provision, that explicit (but lengthy) reference to fraud or misrepresentation has been replaced by citation of § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), which uses almost the same language to define a class of excludable aliens. We think it if not obvious, then at least inevitable, that the phrase "that fraud or misrepresentation" refers to the fraud or misrepresentation for which waiver is sought, alluded to, through citation of § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), in the prologue. 519US1$$4K 06-02-99 14:28:19 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 26 (1996) 31 Opinion of the Court ing the requirement that the alien have been "otherwise ad- missible," establishes only the alien's eligibility for the waiver. Such eligibility in no way limits the considerations that may guide the Attorney General in exercising her dis- cretion to determine who, among those eligible, will be ac- corded grace. It could be argued that if the Attorney Gen- eral determined that any entry fraud or misrepresentation, no matter how minor and no matter what the attendant cir- cumstances, would cause her to withhold waiver, she would not be exercising the conferred discretion at all, but would be making a nullity of the statute. But that is a far cry from respondent's argument that all entry fraud must be excused, which is untenable. Respondent asserts (and the United States acknowledges) that it is the settled policy of the INS to disregard entry fraud or misrepresentation, no matter how egregious, in making the waiver determination. See Delmundo v. INS, 43 F. 3d 436, 440 (CA9 1994). This is such a generous dispo- sition that it may suggest a belief on the part of the agency that the statute requires it; and such a belief is also sug- gested by the INS's frequent concessions in litigation that the underlying fraud for which the alien is deportable "should not be considered as an adverse factor in the balanc- ing equation," Liwanag v. INS, 872 F. 2d 685, 687 (CA5 1989); see also Braun v. INS, 992 F. 2d 1016, 1020 (CA9 1993); Start v. INS, 803 F. 2d 539, 542 (CA9 1986), withdrawn, 862 F. 2d 787 (1988). (Such concessions were facilitated, no doubt, by the Ninth Circuit's frequent intimations that the statute for- bade consideration of the initial fraud. See Hernandez- Robledo v. INS, 777 F. 2d 536, 541 (1985); see also Braun, supra, at 1020; Delmundo, supra, at 441.) Before us, how- ever, the United States disclaims such a position-and even if that were the agency's view we could not permit it to over- come the unmistakable text of the law. See MCI Telecom- munications Corp. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 512 U. S. 218, 229­230 (1994). But that does not render the 519US1$$4K 06-02-99 14:28:19 PAGES OPINPGT 32 INS v. YUEH-SHAIO YANG Opinion of the Court INS's practice irrelevant. Though the agency's discretion is unfettered at the outset, if it announces and follows-by rule or by settled course of adjudication-a general policy by which its exercise of discretion will be governed, an irratio- nal departure from that policy (as opposed to an avowed alteration of it) could constitute action that must be over- turned as "arbitrary, capricious, [or] an abuse of discretion" within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U. S. C. § 706(2)(A). The INS has not, however, disregarded its general policy here; it has merely taken a narrow view of what constitutes "entry fraud" under that policy, excluding events removed in time and circumstance from respondent's entry: his preentry and postentry sham divorces, and the fraud in his 1982 application for naturalization. The "entry fraud" exception being, under the current statute, a rule of the INS's own invention, the INS is entitled, within reason, to define that exception as it pleases. The Ninth Circuit held that the acts of fraud counted against respondent can be described as "inextricably intertwined" with, or an "ex- tension" of, the fraudulent entry itself because they were essential to its ultimate success or concealment. Perhaps so, but it is up to the Attorney General whether she will adopt an "inextricably intertwined" or "essential extension" augmentation of her "entry fraud" exception. It is as- suredly rational, and therefore lawful, for her to distinguish aliens such as respondent who engage in a pattern of immi- gration fraud from aliens who commit a single, isolated act of misrepresentation. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed. It is so ordered. 519US1$$5Z 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT OCTOBER TERM, 1996 33 Syllabus OHIO v. ROBINETTE certiorari to the supreme court of ohio No. 95­891. Argued October 8, 1996-Decided November 18, 1996 After an Ohio deputy sheriff stopped respondent Robinette for speeding, gave him a verbal warning, and returned his driver's license, the deputy asked whether he was carrying illegal contraband, weapons, or drugs in his car. Robinette answered "no" and consented to a search of the car, which revealed a small amount of marijuana and a pill. He was arrested and later charged with knowing possession of a con- trolled substance when the pill turned out to be methylenedioxy- methamphetamine. Following denial of his pretrial suppression mo- tion, he was found guilty, but the Ohio Court of Appeals reversed on the ground that the search resulted from an unlawful detention. The State Supreme Court affirmed, establishing as a bright-line prerequisite for consensual interrogation under these circumstances the requirement that an officer clearly state when a citizen validly detained for a traffic offense is "legally free to go." Held:1. This Court has jurisdiction to review the Ohio Supreme Court's decision. The contention that jurisdiction is lacking because the Ohio decision rested in part upon the State Constitution is rejected under Michigan v. Long, 463 U. S. 1032, 1040­1041. Although the opinion below mentions the Ohio Constitution in passing, it clearly relies on federal law, discussing and citing federal cases almost exclusively. It is not dispositive that those citations appear only in the opinion and not in the official syllabus. Under Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., 433 U. S. 562, 566, it is permissible to turn to an Ohio opinion's body when the syllabus speaks only in general terms of "the federal and Ohio Constitutions." Nor is the Court's jurisdiction defeated by the addi- tional holding below that continuing detention of a person stopped for a traffic violation constitutes an illegal seizure when the officer's motiva- tion for continuing is not related to the purpose of the original, constitu- tional stop and there are no articulable facts giving rise to a suspicion of some separate illegal activity. Under Whren v. United States, 517 U. S. 806, 813, the officer's subjective intentions do not make continued detention illegal, so long as the detention is justified by the circum- stances viewed objectively. Pp. 36­39. 2. The Fourth Amendment does not require that a lawfully seized defendant be advised that he is "free to go" before his consent to search 519US1$$5Z 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT 34 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Syllabus will be recognized as voluntary. The Amendment's touchstone is rea- sonableness, which is measured in objective terms by examining the totality of the circumstances. In applying this test, the Court has con- sistently eschewed bright-line rules, instead emphasizing the fact- specific nature of the reasonableness inquiry. Indeed, in rejecting a per se rule very similar to one adopted below, this Court has held that the voluntariness of a consent to search is a question of fact to be deter- mined from all the circumstances. Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U. S. 218, 248­249. The Ohio Supreme Court erred in holding other- wise. It would be unrealistic to require the police to always inform detainees that they are free to go before a consent to search may be deemed voluntary. Cf. id., at 231. Pp. 39­40. 73 Ohio St. 3d 650, 653 N. E. 2d 695, reversed and remanded. Rehnquist, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which O'Con- nor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, post, p. 40. Stevens, J., filed a dissenting opinion, post, p. 45. Carley J. Ingram argued the cause for petitioner. With her on the briefs was Mathias H. Heck, Jr. Irving L. Gornstein argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae urging reversal. On the brief were Solicitor General Days, Acting Assistant Attorney General Keeney, Deputy Solicitor General Dreeben, Paul A. Engel- mayer, and Joseph C. Wyderko. James D. Ruppert argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.* *Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the State of Ala- bama et al. by Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General of Ohio, Jeffrey S. Sutton, State Solicitor, and Simon B. Karas, and by the Attorneys General for their respective States as follows: Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Daniel E. Lungren of California, Gale A. Norton of Colorado, M. Jane Brady of Delaware, Robert Butterworth of Florida, Margery S. Bronster of Hawaii, Alan G. Lance of Idaho, Jim Ryan of Illinois, Carla J. Stovall of Kansas, A. B. Chandler III of Kentucky, Richard P. Ieyoub of Louisiana, Andrew Ketterer of Maine, J. Joseph Curran, Jr., of Maryland, Scott Harshbarger of Massachusetts, Frank J. Kelley of Michigan, Hubert H. Humphrey III of Minnesota, Mike Moore of Mississippi, Joseph P. Ma- zurek of Montana, Don Stenberg of Nebraska, Frankie Sue Del Papa 519US1$$5H 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 35 Opinion of the Court Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court. We are here presented with the question whether the Fourth Amendment requires that a lawfully seized defendant must be advised that he is "free to go" before his consent to search will be recognized as voluntary. We hold that it does not. This case arose on a stretch of Interstate 70 north of Day- ton, Ohio, where the posted speed limit was 45 miles per hour because of construction. Respondent Robert D. Robi- nette was clocked at 69 miles per hour as he drove his car along this stretch of road, and was stopped by Deputy Roger Newsome of the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office. New- some asked for and was handed Robinette's driver's license, and he ran a computer check which indicated that Robinette had no previous violations. Newsome then asked Robinette to step out of his car, turned on his mounted video camera, issued a verbal warning to Robinette, and returned his license. At this point, Newsome asked, "One question before you get gone: [A]re you carrying any illegal contraband in your of Nevada, Jeffrey R. Howard of New Hampshire, Deborah T. Poritz of New Jersey, Dennis C. Vacco of New York, Michael F. Easley of North Carolina, W. A. Drew Edmondson of Oklahoma, Theodore Kulongoski of Oregon, Thomas W. Corbett, Jr., of Pennsylvania, Jeffrey B. Pine of Rhode Island, Mark Bennett of South Dakota, Charles W. Bursen of Tennessee, Dan Morales of Texas, Jeffrey L. Amestoy of Vermont, James S. Gilmore III of Virginia, Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., of West Virginia, James E. Doyle of Wisconsin, and William U. Hill of Wyoming; and for Americans for Effective Law Enforcement, Inc., by Fred E. Inbau, Wayne W. Schmidt, James P. Manak, and Bernard J. Farber. Tracey Maclin, Steven R. Shapiro, and Jeffrey M. Gamso filed a brief for the American Civil Liberties Union et al. as amici curiae urging affirmance. Briefs of amicus curiae were filed for the National Association of Crimi- nal Defense Lawyers by Sheryl Gordon McCloud; and for the Ohio Asso- ciation of Criminal Defense Lawyers by W. Andrew Hasselbach. 519US1$$5H 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT 36 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Opinion of the Court car? Any weapons of any kind, drugs, anything like that?" App. to Brief for Respondent 2 (internal quotation marks omitted). Robinette answered "no" to these questions, after which Deputy Newsome asked if he could search the car. Robinette consented. In the car, Deputy Newsome discov- ered a small amount of marijuana and, in a film container, a pill which was later determined to be methylenedioxymeth- amphetamine (MDMA). Robinette was then arrested and charged with knowing possession of a controlled substance, MDMA, in violation of Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2925.11(A) (1993). Before trial, Robinette unsuccessfully sought to suppress this evidence. He then pleaded "no contest," and was found guilty. On appeal, the Ohio Court of Appeals reversed, rul- ing that the search resulted from an unlawful detention. The Supreme Court of Ohio, by a divided vote, affirmed. 73 Ohio St. 3d 650, 653 N. E. 2d 695 (1995). In its opinion, that court established a bright-line prerequisite for consensual interrogation under these circumstances: "The right, guaranteed by the federal and Ohio Consti- tutions, to be secure in one's person and property re- quires that citizens stopped for traffic offenses be clearly informed by the detaining officer when they are free to go after a valid detention, before an officer attempts to engage in a consensual interrogation. Any attempt at consensual interrogation must be preceded by the phrase `At this time you legally are free to go' or by words of similar import." Id., at 650­651, 653 N. E. 2d, at 696. We granted certiorari, 516 U. S. 1157 (1996), to review this per se rule, and we now reverse. We must first consider whether we have jurisdiction to review the Ohio Supreme Court's decision. Respondent contends that we lack such jurisdiction because the Ohio decision rested upon the Ohio Constitution, in addition to the 519US1$$5H 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 37 Opinion of the Court Federal Constitution. Under Michigan v. Long, 463 U. S. 1032 (1983), when "a state court decision fairly appears to rest primarily on federal law, or to be interwoven with the federal law, and when the adequacy and independence of any possible state law ground is not clear from the face of the opinion, we will accept as the most reasonable explanation that the state court decided the case the way it did because it believed that federal law required it to do so." * Id., at 1040­1041. Although the opinion below mentions Art. I, § 14, of the Ohio Constitution in passing (a section which reads identically to the Fourth Amendment), the opinion clearly relies on federal law nevertheless. Indeed, the only cases it discusses or even cites are federal cases, except for one state case which itself applies the Federal Constitution. Our jurisdiction is not defeated by the fact that these cita- tions appear in the body of the opinion, while, under Ohio law, "[the] Supreme Court speaks as a court only through the syllabi of its cases." See Ohio v. Gallagher, 425 U. S. 257, 259 (1976). When the syllabus, as here, speaks only in general terms of "the federal and Ohio Constitutions," it is permissible for us to turn to the body of the opinion to dis- cern the grounds for decision. Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., 433 U. S. 562, 566 (1977). Respondent Robinette also contends that we may not reach the question presented in the petition because the Supreme Court of Ohio also held, as set out in the syllabus paragraph (1): "When the motivation behind a police officer's continued detention of a person stopped for a traffic violation is not related to the purpose of the original, constitutional stop, and when that continued detention is not based on any articulable facts giving rise to a suspicion of some *Respondent and his amici ask us to take this opportunity to depart from Michigan v. Long. We are no more persuaded by this argument now than we were two Terms ago, see Arizona v. Evans, 514 U. S. 1 (1995), and we again reaffirm the Long presumption. 519US1$$5H 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT 38 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Opinion of the Court separate illegal activity justifying an extension of the detention, the continued detention constitutes an illegal seizure." 73 Ohio St. 3d, at 650, 653 N. E. 2d, at 696. In reliance on this ground, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that when Newsome returned to Robinette's car and asked him to get out of the car, after he had determined in his own mind not to give Robinette a ticket, the detention then became unlawful. Respondent failed to make any such argument in his brief in opposition to certiorari. See this Court's Rule 15.2. We believe the issue as to the continuing legality of the detention is a "predicate to an intelligent resolution" of the question presented, and therefore "fairly included therein." This Court's Rule 14.1(a); Vance v. Terrazas, 444 U. S. 252, 258­ 259, n. 5 (1980). The parties have briefed this issue, and we proceed to decide it. We think that under our recent decision in Whren v. United States, 517 U. S. 806 (1996) (decided after the Supreme Court of Ohio decided the present case), the sub- jective intentions of the officer did not make the continued detention of respondent illegal under the Fourth Amend- ment. As we made clear in Whren, " `the fact that [an] offi- cer does not have the state of mind which is hypothecated by the reasons which provide the legal justification for the officer's action does not invalidate the action taken as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify that action.' . . . Subjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable- cause Fourth Amendment analysis." Id., at 813 (quoting Scott v. United States, 436 U. S. 128, 138 (1978)). And there is no question that, in light of the admitted probable cause to stop Robinette for speeding, Deputy Newsome was ob- jectively justified in asking Robinette to get out of the car, subjective thoughts notwithstanding. See Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U. S. 106, 111, n. 6 (1977) ("We hold . . . that once a motor vehicle has been lawfully detained for a traffic violation, the police officers may order the driver to get out 519US1$$5H 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 39 Opinion of the Court of the vehicle without violating the Fourth Amendment's proscription of unreasonable searches and seizures"). We now turn to the merits of the question presented. We have long held that the "touchstone of the Fourth Amend- ment is reasonableness." Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U. S. 248, 250 (1991). Reasonableness, in turn, is measured in objec- tive terms by examining the totality of the circumstances. In applying this test we have consistently eschewed bright-line rules, instead emphasizing the fact-specific nature of the reasonableness inquiry. Thus, in Florida v. Royer, 460 U. S. 491 (1983), we expressly disavowed any "litmus- paper test" or single "sentence or . . . paragraph . . . rule," in recognition of the "endless variations in the facts and circumstances" implicating the Fourth Amendment. Id., at 506. Then, in Michigan v. Chesternut, 486 U. S. 567 (1988), when both parties urged "bright-line rule[s] applicable to all investigatory pursuits," we rejected both proposed rules as contrary to our "traditional contextual approach." Id., at 572­573. And again, in Florida v. Bostick, 501 U. S. 429 (1991), when the Florida Supreme Court adopted a per se rule that questioning aboard a bus always constitutes a sei- zure, we reversed, reiterating that the proper inquiry neces- sitates a consideration of "all the circumstances surrounding the encounter." Id., at 439. We have previously rejected a per se rule very similar to that adopted by the Supreme Court of Ohio in determining the validity of a consent to search. In Schneckloth v. Busta- monte, 412 U. S. 218 (1973), it was argued that such a consent could not be valid unless the defendant knew that he had a right to refuse the request. We rejected this argument: "While knowledge of the right to refuse consent is one factor to be taken into account, the government need not establish such knowledge as the sine qua non of an effective consent." Id., at 227. And just as it "would be thoroughly impractical to impose on the normal consent search the detailed require- ments of an effective warning," id., at 231, so too would it be 519US1$$5H 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT 40 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Ginsburg, J., concurring in judgment unrealistic to require police officers to always inform detain- ees that they are free to go before a consent to search may be deemed voluntary. The Fourth Amendment test for a valid consent to search is that the consent be voluntary, and "[v]oluntariness is a question of fact to be determined from all the circum- stances," id., at 248­249. The Supreme Court of Ohio hav- ing held otherwise, its judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. Justice Ginsburg, concurring in the judgment. Robert Robinette's traffic stop for a speeding violation on an interstate highway in Ohio served as prelude to a search of his automobile for illegal drugs. Robinette's experience was not uncommon in Ohio. As the Ohio Supreme Court related, the sheriff's deputy who detained Robinette for speeding and then asked Robinette for permission to search his vehicle "was on drug interdiction patrol at the time." 73 Ohio St. 3d 650, 651, 653 N. E. 2d 695, 696 (1995). The dep- uty testified in Robinette's case that he routinely requested permission to search automobiles he stopped for traffic violations. Ibid. According to the deputy's testimony in another prosecution, he requested consent to search in 786 traffic stops in 1992, the year of Robinette's arrest. State v. Retherford, 93 Ohio App. 3d 586, 594, n. 3, 639 N. E. 2d 498, 503, n. 3, dism'd, 69 Ohio St. 3d 1488, 635 N. E. 2d 43 (1994). From their unique vantage point, Ohio's courts observed that traffic stops in the State were regularly giving way to contraband searches, characterized as consensual, even when officers had no reason to suspect illegal activity. One Ohio appellate court noted: "[H]undreds, and perhaps thousands of Ohio citizens are being routinely delayed in their travels and asked to relinquish to uniformed police officers their 519US1$$5P 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 41 Ginsburg, J., concurring in judgment right to privacy in their automobiles and luggage, sometimes for no better reason than to provide an officer the opportu- nity to `practice' his drug interdiction technique." 93 Ohio App. 3d, at 594, 639 N. E. 2d, at 503 (footnote omitted). Against this background, the Ohio Supreme Court deter- mined, and announced in Robinette's case, that the federal and state constitutional rights of Ohio citizens to be secure in their persons and property called for the protection of a clear-cut instruction to the State's police officers: An officer wishing to engage in consensual interrogation of a motorist at the conclusion of a traffic stop must first tell the motorist that he or she is free to go. The Ohio Supreme Court de- scribed the need for its first-tell-then-ask rule this way: "The transition between detention and a consensual exchange can be so seamless that the untrained eye may not notice that it has occurred. . . . . . . . . "Most people believe that they are validly in a police officer's custody as long as the officer continues to inter- rogate them. The police officer retains the upper hand and the accouterments of authority. That the officer lacks legal license to continue to detain them is unknown to most citizens, and a reasonable person would not feel free to walk away as the officer continues to address him.. . . . . "While the legality of consensual encounters between police and citizens should be preserved, we do not be- lieve that this legality should be used by police officers to turn a routine traffic stop into a fishing expedition for unrelated criminal activity. The Fourth Amendment to the federal Constitution and Section 14, Article I of the Ohio Constitution exist to protect citizens against such an unreasonable interference with their liberty." 73 Ohio St. 3d, at 654­655, 653 N. E. 2d, at 698­699. 519US1$$5P 06-02-99 14:40:30 PAGES OPINPGT 42 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Ginsburg, J., concurring in judgment Today's opinion reversing the decision of the Ohio Su- preme Court does not pass judgment on the wisdom of the first-tell-then-ask rule. This Court's opinion simply clarifies that the Ohio Supreme Court's instruction to police officers in Ohio is not, under this Court's controlling jurisprudence, the command of the Federal Constitution. See ante, at 39­ 40. The Ohio Supreme Court invoked both the Federal Con- stitution and the Ohio Constitution without clearly indicating whether state law, standing alone, independently justified the court's rule. The ambiguity in the Ohio Supreme Court's decision renders this Court's exercise of jurisdiction proper under Michigan v. Long, 463 U. S. 1032, 1040­1042 (1983), and this Court's decision on the merits is consistent with the Court's "totality of the circumstances" Fourth Amendment precedents, see ante, at 39. I therefore concur in the Court's judgment. I write separately, however, because it seems to me im- probable that the Ohio Supreme Court understood its first- tell-then-ask rule to be the Federal Constitution's mandate for the Nation as a whole. "[A] State is free as a matter of its own law to impose greater restrictions on police activity than those this Court holds to be necessary upon federal con- stitutional standards." Oregon v. Hass, 420 U. S. 714, 719 (1975).* But ordinarily, when a state high court grounds a rule of criminal procedure in the Federal Constitution, the *Formerly, the Ohio Supreme Court was "reluctant to use the Ohio Con- stitution to extend greater protection to the rights and civil liberties of Ohio citizens" and had usually not taken advantage of opportunities to "us[e] the Ohio Constitution as an independent source of constitutional rights." Arnold v. Cleveland, 67 Ohio St. 3d 35, 42, n. 8, 616 N. E. 2d 163, 168, n. 8 (1993). Recently, however, the state high court declared: "The Ohio Constitution is a document of independent force. . . . As long as state courts provide at least as much protection as the United States Supreme Court has provided in its interpretation of the federal Bill of Rights, state courts are unrestricted in according greater civil liberties and protections to individuals and groups." Id., at 35, 616 N. E. 2d, at 164 (syllabus). 519US1$$5P 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 43 Ginsburg, J., concurring in judgment court thereby signals its view that the Nation's Constitution would require the rule in all 50 States. Given this Court's decisions in consent-to-search cases such as Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U. S. 218 (1973), and Florida v. Bostick, 501 U. S. 429 (1991), however, I suspect that the Ohio Supreme Court may not have homed in on the implication ordinarily to be drawn from a state court's reliance on the Federal Con- stitution. In other words, I question whether the Ohio court thought of the strict rule it announced as a rule for the governance of police conduct not only in Miami County, Ohio, but also in Miami, Florida. The first-tell-then-ask rule seems to be a prophylactic measure not so much extracted from the text of any consti- tutional provision as crafted by the Ohio Supreme Court to reduce the number of violations of textually guaranteed rights. In Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966), this Court announced a similarly motivated rule as a minimal national requirement without suggesting that the text of the Federal Constitution required the precise measures the Court's opinion set forth. See id., at 467 ("[T]he Constitu- tion [does not] necessarily requir[e] adherence to any particu- lar solution" to the problems associated with custodial inter- rogations.); see also Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U. S. 298, 306 (1985) ("The Miranda exclusionary rule . . . sweeps more broadly than the Fifth Amendment itself."). Although all parts of the United States fall within this Court's domain, the Ohio Supreme Court is not similarly situated. That court can declare prophylactic rules governing the conduct of officials in Ohio, but it cannot command the police forces of sister States. The very ease with which the Court today disposes of the federal leg of the Ohio Supreme Court's deci- sion strengthens my impression that the Ohio Supreme Court saw its rule as a measure made for Ohio, designed to reinforce in that State the right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. 519US1$$5P 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT 44 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Ginsburg, J., concurring in judgment The Ohio Supreme Court's syllabus and opinion, however, were ambiguous. Under Long, the existence of ambiguity regarding the federal- or state-law basis of a state-court decision will trigger this Court's jurisdiction. Long governs even when, all things considered, the more plausible reading of the state court's decision may be that the state court did not regard the Federal Constitution alone as a sufficient basis for its ruling. Compare Arizona v. Evans, 514 U. S. 1, 7­9 (1995), with id., at 31­33 (Ginsburg, J., dissenting). It is incumbent on a state court, therefore, when it deter- mines that its State's laws call for protection more complete than the Federal Constitution demands, to be clear about its ultimate reliance on state law. Similarly, a state court announcing a new legal rule arguably derived from both federal and state law can definitively render state law an adequate and independent ground for its decision by a simple declaration to that effect. A recent Montana Su- preme Court opinion on the scope of an individual's privilege against self-incrimination includes such a declaration: "While we have devoted considerable time to a lengthy discussion of the application of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, it is to be noted that this holding is also based separately and independently on [the defendant's] right to remain silent pursuant to Arti- cle II, Section 25 of the Montana Constitution." State v. Fuller, 276 Mont. 155, 167, 915 P. 2d 809, 816, cert. denied, post, p. 930. An explanation of this order meets the Court's instruction in Long that "[i]f the state court decision indicates clearly and expressly that it is alternatively based on bona fide separate, adequate, and independent grounds, [this Court] will not undertake to review the decision." 463 U. S., at 1041. On remand, the Ohio Supreme Court may choose to clarify that its instructions to law enforcement officers in Ohio find 519US1$$5P 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 45 Stevens, J., dissenting adequate and independent support in state law, and that in issuing these instructions, the court endeavored to state dis- positively only the law applicable in Ohio. See Evans, 514 U. S., at 30­34 (Ginsburg, J., dissenting). To avoid misun- derstanding, the Ohio Supreme Court must itself speak with the clarity it sought to require of its State's police officers. The efficacy of its endeavor to safeguard the liberties of Ohi- oans without disarming the State's police can then be tested in the precise way Our Federalism was designed to work. See, e. g., Kaye, State Courts at the Dawn of a New Century: Common Law Courts Reading Statutes and Constitutions, 70 N. Y. U. L. Rev. 1, 11­18 (1995); Linde, First Things First: Rediscovering the States' Bills of Rights, 9 U. Balt. L. Rev. 379, 392­396 (1980). Justice Stevens, dissenting. The Court's holding today is narrow: The Federal Consti- tution does not require that a lawfully seized person be advised that he is "free to go" before his consent to search will be recognized as voluntary. I agree with that holding. Given the Court's reading of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Ohio, I also agree that it is appropriate for the Court to limit its review to answering the sole question presented in the State's certiorari petition.1 As I read the state-court opinion, however, the prophylactic rule an- nounced in the second syllabus was intended as a guide to the decision of future cases rather than an explanation of the decision in this case. I would therefore affirm the judgment of the Supreme Court of Ohio because it correctly held that respondent's consent to the search of his vehicle was the product of an unlawful detention. Moreover, it is important 1 "Whether the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires police officers to inform motorists, lawfully stopped for traffic violations, that the legal detention has concluded before any subsequent interrogation or search will be found to be consensual?" Pet. for Cert. i. 519US1$$5I 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT 46 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Stevens, J., dissenting to emphasize that nothing in the Federal Constitution-or in this Court's opinion-prevents a State from requiring its law enforcement officers to give detained motorists the advice mandated by the Ohio court. I The relevant facts are undisputed.2 Officer Newsome stopped respondent because he was speeding. Neither at the time of the stop nor at any later time prior to the search of respondent's vehicle did the officer have any basis for be- lieving that there were drugs in the car. After ordering respondent to get out of his car, issuing a warning, and re- turning his driver's license, Newsome took no further action related to the speeding violation. He did, however, state: "One question before you get gone: are you carrying any illegal contraband in your car? Any weapons of any kind, drugs, anything like that?" Thereafter, he obtained re- spondent's consent to search the car. These facts give rise to two questions of law: whether re- spondent was still being detained when the "one question" was asked, and, if so, whether that detention was unlawful. In my opinion the Ohio Appellate Court and the Ohio Supreme Court correctly answered both of those questions. The Ohio Supreme Court correctly relied upon United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U. S. 544 (1980),3 which stated that "a person has been `seized' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment . . . if, in view of all of the circumstances sur- rounding the incident, a reasonable person would have be- lieved that he was not free to leave." Id., at 554 (opinion of Stewart, J.); see Michigan v. Chesternut, 486 U. S. 567, 573 (1988) (noting that "[t]he Court has since embraced this test"). See also Florida v. Bostick, 501 U. S. 429, 435­436 (1991) (applying variant of this approach). The Ohio Court 2 This is in part because crucial portions of the exchange were video- taped; this recording is a part of the record. 3 See 73 Ohio St. 3d 650, 654, 653 N. E. 2d 695, 698 (1995). 519US1$$5I 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 47 Stevens, J., dissenting of Appeals applied a similar analysis. See App. to Pet. for Cert. 17­18. Several circumstances support the Ohio courts' conclusion that a reasonable motorist in respondent's shoes would have believed that he had an obligation to answer the "one ques- tion" and that he could not simply walk away from the offi- cer, get back in his car, and drive away. The question itself sought an answer "before you get gone." In addition, the facts that respondent had been detained, had received no ad- vice that he was free to leave, and was then standing in front of a television camera in response to an official command are all inconsistent with an assumption that he could reasonably believe that he had no duty to respond. The Ohio Supreme Court was surely correct in stating: "Most people believe that they are validly in a police officer's custody as long as the officer continues to interrogate them. The police officer retains the upper hand and the accouterments of authority. That the officer lacks legal license to continue to detain them is unknown to most citizens, and a reasonable person would not feel free to walk away as the officer continues to address him." 73 Ohio St. 3d, at 655, 653 N. E. 2d, at 698.4 Moreover, as an objective matter it is fair to presume that most drivers who have been stopped for speeding are in a hurry to get to their destinations; such drivers have no inter- est in prolonging the delay occasioned by the stop just to engage in idle conversation with an officer, much less to allow 4 A learned commentator has expressed agreement on this point. See 4 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure § 9.3(a), p. 112 (3d ed. 1996 and Supp. 1997) ("Given the fact that [defendant] quite clearly had been seized when his car was pulled over, the return of the credentials hardly manifests a change in status when it was immediately followed by interrogation con- cerning other criminal activity"); see also ibid. (approving of Ohio Su- preme Court's analysis in this case). We have indicated as much our- selves in the past. See Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U. S. 420, 436 (1984) ("Certainly few motorists would feel free either to disobey a directive to pull over or to leave the scene of a traffic stop without being told they might do so"). 519US1$$5I 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT 48 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Stevens, J., dissenting a potentially lengthy search.5 I also assume that motor- ists-even those who are not carrying contraband-have an interest in preserving the privacy of their vehicles and pos- sessions from the prying eyes of a curious stranger. The fact that this particular officer successfully used a similar method of obtaining consent to search roughly 786 times in one year, State v. Retherford, 93 Ohio App. 3d 586, 591­ 592, 639 N. E. 2d 498, 502, dism'd, 69 Ohio St. 3d 1488, 635 N. E. 2d 43 (1994), indicates that motorists generally respond in a manner that is contrary to their self-interest. Repeated decisions by ordinary citizens to surrender that interest can- not satisfactorily be explained on any hypothesis other than an assumption that they believed they had a legal duty to do so. The Ohio Supreme Court was therefore entirely correct to presume in the first syllabus preceding its opinion that a "continued detention" was at issue here. 73 Ohio St. 3d, at 650, 653 N. E. 2d, at 696.6 The Ohio Court of Appeals reached a similar conclusion. In response to the State's con- 5 Though this search does not appear to have been particularly intrusive, that may not always be so. See Brief for American Civil Liberties Union et al. as Amici Curiae 28­29. Indeed, our holding in Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U. S. 248 (1991), allowing police to open closed containers in the con- text of an automobile consent search where the "consent would reasonably be understood to extend to a particular container," id., at 252, ensures that many motorists will wind up "consenting" to a far broader search than they might have imagined. See id., at 254­255 ("only objection that the police could have to" a rule requiring police to seek consent to search containers as well as the automobile itself "is that it would prevent them from exploiting the ignorance of a citizen who simply did not anticipate that his consent to search the car would be understood to authorize the police to rummage through his packages") (Marshall, J., dissenting). 6 It is ordinarily the syllabus that precedes an Ohio Supreme Court opin- ion, rather than the opinion itself, that states the law of the case. Cassidy v. Glossip, 12 Ohio St. 2d 17, 24, 231 N. E. 2d 64, 68 (1967); see Migra v. Warren City School Dist. Bd. of Ed., 465 U. S. 75, 86, n. 8 (1984); Ohio v. Gallagher, 425 U. S. 257, 259 (1976). 519US1$$5I 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 49 Stevens, J., dissenting tention that Robinette "was free to go" at the time consent was sought, that court held-after reviewing the record- that "a reasonable person in Robinette's position would not believe that the investigative stop had been concluded, and that he or she was free to go, so long as the police officer was continuing to ask investigative questions." App. to Pet. for Cert. 17­18. As I read the Ohio opinions, these determi- nations were independent of the bright-line rule criticized by the majority.7 I see no reason to disturb them. In the first syllabus, the Ohio Supreme Court also an- swered the question whether the officer's continued deten- tion of respondent was lawful or unlawful. See ante, at 37­ 38. Although there is a possible ambiguity in the use of the word "motivation" in the Ohio Supreme Court's explanation of why the traffic officer's continued detention of respondent was an illegal seizure, the first syllabus otherwise was a cor- rect statement of the relevant federal rule as well as the relevant Ohio rule. As this Court points out in its opinion, as a matter of federal law the subjective motivation of the officer does not determine the legality of a detention. Be- cause I assume that the learned judges sitting on the Ohio Supreme Court were well aware of this proposition, we should construe the syllabus generously by replacing the ambiguous term "motivation behind" with the term "justifi- cation for" in order to make the syllabus unambiguously state the correct rule of federal law. So amended, the con- trolling proposition of federal law reads: "When the [justification for] a police officer's continued detention of a person stopped for a traffic violation is 7 Indeed, the first paragraph of the Ohio Supreme Court's opinion clearly indicates that the bright-line rule was meant to apply only in future cases. The Ohio Supreme Court first explained: "We find that the search was invalid since it was the product of an unlawful seizure." 73 Ohio St. 3d, at 652, 653 N. E. 2d, at 697. Only then did the court proceed to point out that it would "also use this case to establish a bright-line test . . . ." Ibid. 519US1$$5I 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT 50 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Stevens, J., dissenting not related to the purpose of the original, constitutional stop, and when that continued detention is not based on any articulable facts giving rise to a suspicion of some separate illegal activity justifying an extension of the detention, the continued detention constitutes an illegal seizure." 73 Ohio St. 3d, at 650, 653 N. E. 2d, at 696. Notwithstanding that the subjective motivation for the officer's decision to stop respondent related to drug inter- diction, the legality of the stop depended entirely on the fact that respondent was speeding. Of course, "[a]s a general matter, the decision to stop an automobile is reasonable where the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred." Whren v. United States, 517 U. S. 806, 810 (1996). As noted above, however, by the time Robi- nette was asked for consent to search his automobile, the lawful traffic stop had come to an end; Robinette had been given his warning, and the speeding violation provided no further justification for detention. The continued detention was therefore only justifiable, if at all, on some other grounds.8 At no time prior to the search of respondent's vehicle did any articulable facts give rise to a reasonable suspicion of some separate illegal activity that would justify further detention. See United States v. Sharpe, 470 U. S. 675, 682 (1985); United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U. S. 873, 881­ 882 (1975); Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1, 21 (1968). As an objec- tive matter, it inexorably follows that when the officer had completed his task of either arresting or reprimanding the driver of the speeding car, his continued detention of that 8 Cf. Florida v. Royer, 460 U. S. 491, 500 (1983) (plurality opinion) ("[A]n investigative detention must be temporary and last no longer than is nec- essary to effectuate the purpose of the stop"); United States v. Brignoni- Ponce, 422 U. S. 873, 881 (1975) ("stop and inquiry must be `reasonably related in scope to the justification for their initiation' " (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1, 29 (1968)). 519US1$$5I 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 51 Stevens, J., dissenting person constituted an illegal seizure. This holding by the Ohio Supreme Court is entirely consistent with federal law.9 The proper disposition follows as an application of well- settled law. We held in Florida v. Royer, 460 U. S. 491 (1983), that a consent obtained during an illegal detention is ordinarily ineffective to justify an otherwise invalid search.10 See also Florida v. Bostick, 501 U. S., at 433­434 (noting that if consent was given during the course of an unlawful seizure, the results of the search "must be suppressed as tainted fruit"); Dunaway v. New York, 442 U. S. 200, 218­219 (1979); Brown v. Illinois, 422 U. S. 590, 601­602 (1975). Cf. Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U. S. 471 (1963). Because Robi- nette's consent to the search was the product of an unlawful detention, "the consent was tainted by the illegality and was ineffective to justify the search." Royer, 460 U. S., at 507­ 508 (plurality opinion). I would therefore affirm the judg- ment below. II A point correctly raised by Justice Ginsburg merits em- phasis. The Court's opinion today does not address either the wisdom of the rule announced in the second syllabus pre- 9 Since "this Court reviews judgments, not opinions," Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837, 842 (1984), the Ohio Supreme Court's holding that Robinette's continued seizure was illegal on these grounds provides a sufficient basis for affirming its judgment. 10 Writing for a plurality of the Court, Justice White explained that "statements given during a period of illegal detention are inadmissible even though voluntarily given if they are the product of the illegal deten- tion and not the result of an independent act of free will." 460 U. S., at 501. The defendant in Royer had been "illegally detained when he con- sented to the search." Id., at 507. As a result, the plurality agreed that "the consent was tainted by the illegality and was ineffective to justify the search." Id., at 507­508. Concurring in the result, Justice Brennan agreed with this much of the plurality's decision, diverging on other grounds. See id., at 509. Justice Brennan's agreement on that narrow principle represents the holding of the Court. See Marks v. United States, 430 U. S. 188, 193 (1977). 519US1$$5I 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT 52 OHIO v. ROBINETTE Stevens, J., dissenting ceding the Ohio Supreme Court's opinion or the validity of that rule as a matter of Ohio law. Nevertheless the risk that the narrowness of the Court's holding may not be fully understood prompts these additional words. There is no rule of federal law that precludes Ohio from requiring its police officers to give its citizens warnings that will help them to understand whether a valid traffic stop has come to an end, and will help judges to decide whether a reasonable person would have felt free to leave under the circumstances at issue in any given case.11 Nor, as I have previously observed, is there anything "in the Federal Con- stitution that prohibits a State from giving lawmaking power to its courts." Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co., 449 U. S. 456, 479, and n. 3 (1981) (dissenting opinion). Thus, as far as we are concerned, whether Ohio acts through one branch of its government or another, it has the same power to enforce a warning rule as other States that may adopt such rules by executive action.12 11 Indeed, we indicated in Florida v. Bostick, 501 U. S. 429, 437 (1991), that the fact a defendant had been explicitly advised that he could refuse to give consent was relevant to the question whether he was seized at the time consent was sought. And, in other cases, we have stressed the importance of similar advice as a circumstance supporting the conclusion that a consent to search was voluntary. See Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U. S. 218, 227 (1973); United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U. S. 544, 558­ 559 (1980). Cf. Washington v. Chrisman, 455 U. S. 1, 9 (1982) (consent to search was voluntary where defendant "consented, in writing, . . . after being advised that his consent must be voluntary and that he had an abso- lute right to refuse consent"). 12 As we are informed by a brief amicus curiae filed by Americans For Effective Law Enforcement, Inc.: "Such a warning may be good police practice, and indeed amicus knows that many law enforcement agencies among our constituents have routinely incorporated a warning into their Fourth Amendment consent forms that they use in the field, but it is pre- cisely that-a practice and not a constitutional imperative. An officer who includes such a warning in his request for consent undoubtedly pre- sents a stronger case for a finding of voluntariness in a suppression hear- ing, and we would not suggest that such agencies and officers do other- 519US1$$5I 06-02-99 14:40:31 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 33 (1996) 53 Stevens, J., dissenting Moreover, while I recognize that warning rules provide benefits to the law enforcement profession and the courts, as well as to the public, I agree that it is not our function to pass judgment on the wisdom of such rules. Accordingly, while I have concluded that the judgment of the Supreme Court of Ohio should be affirmed, and thus dissent from this Court's disposition of the case, I am in full accord with its conclusion that the Federal Constitution neither mandates nor prohibits the warnings prescribed by the Ohio Court. Whether such a practice should be followed in Ohio is a mat- ter for Ohio lawmakers to decide. wise. We know, too, that instructors in many police training programs of leading universities and management institutes routinely recommend such warnings as a sound practice, likely to bolster the voluntariness of a con- sent to search. [We ourselves] conduc[t] law enforcement training pro- grams at the national level and many of our own speakers have made this very point." Brief for Americans For Effective Law Enforcement, Inc., as Amicus Curiae 7. 519US1$$6Z 06-02-99 14:45:20 PAGES OPINPGT 54 OCTOBER TERM, 1996 Per Curiam UNITED STATES et al. v. JOSE, trustee of JOSE BUSINESS TRUST et al. on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 95­2082. Decided December 2, 1996 In a proceeding to enforce two Internal Revenue Service (IRS) sum- monses issued to respondent, petitioners, the United States and an IRS agent, represented that the documents sought were for a civil investiga- tion. The Magistrate found the summonses valid and enforceable for the purpose stated. As the Magistrate recommended, the District Court ordered enforcement of the summonses, but required the IRS to give respondent five days' notice before transferring summoned infor- mation from its Examination Division to any other IRS office. Chal- lenging the District Court's authority to impose such a restriction, the IRS appealed. The Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal as not ripe be- cause the record did not indicate that the Examination Division had attempted to disclose the documents to any other IRS division; there- fore the five-day notice requirement had not been triggered. Held: The District Court issued a final, appealable order. Its decision dispositively granted in part and denied in part the remedy requested. The IRS prevailed to the extent that the District Court enforced the summonses, but did not prevail to the extent that the District Court imposed the five-day notice condition. With that disposition, the Dis- trict Court completed its adjudication. This Court has expressly held that IRS summons enforcement orders are subject to appellate review. Church of Scientology of Cal. v. United States, 506 U. S. 9, 15. Finality, not ripeness, is the doctrine governing appeals from district court to circuit court. The Ninth Circuit cited, and this Court has found, no authority supporting the Ninth Circuit's cryptic declaration that the conditional enforcement order was not ripe for appeal. The Court ex- presses no opinion on the merits of the underlying dispute, but notes that the matter implicates an intercircuit conflict. Certiorari granted; 71 F. 3d 1484, reversed and remanded. Per Curiam. Petitioners, the United States of America and Leslie M. Nishimura, Revenue Agent of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or Service), commenced a proceeding to enforce two 519US1$$6p 06-02-99 14:45:20 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 54 (1996) 55 Per Curiam IRS summonses issued to Laddie F. Jose, as trustee for the Jose Business Trust and Jose Family Trust. The Service represented to the Magistrate that the documents sought "are for the purpose of a civil investigation." App. to Pet. for Cert. 16a. The Magistrate found the summonses valid and enforceable for the purpose stated. He did not address the question whether the summons enforcement require- ments "would be satisfied in the event petitioners decide to pursue a criminal tax investigation." Ibid. That question was not before him in view of the sole purpose-civil investi- gation-specified by the IRS. Ibid. The Magistrate recommended that the District Court (1) enforce petitioners' summonses, and (2) require the IRS to give respondent five days' notice prior to any circulation or transfer of the summoned documents to any division of the IRS other than the Examination Division. Id., at 20a­21a. Before the District Court, neither party objected to the finding that the alleged civil investigation was a legitimate purpose and that the summonses are valid and should be enforced. Id., at 16a. The single issue in controversy was "whether [the court] may restrict enforcement of petitioners' summonses by requiring the IRS to notify respondent five days in advance before circulating, transferring, or copying the summon[ed] documents to any other division of the IRS, including its [C]riminal Investigation Division." Id., at 15a. The District Court determined that the restriction was law- ful and proper and entered a final order to that effect. Id., at 19a. The Service appealed, asserting that the District Court lacked authority to impose the restriction. The Ninth Cir- cuit correctly recognized that it had jurisdiction "pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 1291," which authorizes appeals from "final decisions." It nonetheless dismissed the appeal "as not ripe." 71 F. 3d 1484, 1485 (1995). The majority stated: "The record indicates that the IRS represented to the district court that the documents requested of Jose were 519US1$$6p 06-02-99 14:45:20 PAGES OPINPGT 56 UNITED STATES v. JOSE Per Curiam for civil tax examination purposes only, not for a crimi- nal investigation. The record does not indicate that the Examination Division has attempted to disclose the doc- uments to any other IRS division, thereby triggering the five-day notice requirement. Thus, any detrimental impact the district court's order may have on the IRS's investigation is, at this time, purely speculative. Ac- cordingly, the IRS's appeal is not ripe for review." Ibid. The dissenting judge concluded that the case was "ready and ripe" for decision, id., at 1486, and stated at some length her reasons for believing that the restriction approved by the District Court was unwarranted. The United States and Revenue Agent Nishimura petitioned for certiorari. We called for a response from trustee Jose, but he filed no brief in opposition. We now reverse. We express no opinion on the merits of the underlying dispute. The matter, indeed, is one that implicates an inter- circuit conflict.* We think it clear, however, that the Dis- trict Court's final order is indeed final. It is a decision dis- positively granting in part and denying in part the remedy requested. The IRS prevailed to the extent that the Dis- trict Court enforced the summonses. The Service did not *Compare United States v. Barrett, 837 F. 2d 1341, 1349­1351 (CA5 1988) (en banc) (per curiam) (District Court lacks authority to place condi- tions on enforcement of IRS summons), cert. denied, 492 U. S. 926 (1989), with United States v. Zolin, 809 F. 2d 1411, 1417 (CA9 1987) (upholding conditions on enforcement of IRS summons), aff'd by an equally divided Court, 491 U. S. 554, 561 (1989), and United States v. Author Servs., Inc., 804 F. 2d 1520, 1525­1526 (CA9 1986) (District Court has "considerable" discretion to set terms of enforcement order); see also Church of Scien- tology of Cal. v. United States, 506 U. S. 9, 14­15, n. 7 (1992) (recognizing split). The existing intercircuit conflict concerns judicial limitations on disclosure by the agency seeking summons enforcement to other govern- mental agencies. The instant case involves the related but distinct ques- tion of the District Court's authority to restrict sharing of information within an agency. 519US1$$6p 06-02-99 14:45:20 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 54 (1996) 57 Per Curiam prevail to the extent that the District Court imposed a condi- tion-an unqualified requirement that the IRS provide five days' notice to the trustee before transferring summoned in- formation from its Examination Division to any other IRS office. With that disposition, the District Court completed its adjudication. "[W]e have expressly held that IRS sum- mons enforcement orders are subject to appellate review." Church of Scientology of Cal. v. United States, 506 U. S. 9, 15 (1992) (citing Reisman v. Caplin, 375 U. S. 440, 449 (1964)). We adhere to that view, and note that appellate ju- risdiction over final decisions does not turn on which side prevailed in the District Court. Finality, not ripeness, is the doctrine governing appeals from district court to court of appeals. In this case, to gain access to appeal from the District Court's final decision to the extent that it disfavored the Service, the IRS is not obli- gated, first, to defy the District Court's order. Nor is the IRS required to provide notice of its intention to transfer documents internally, for this is the very condition the IRS seeks to attack on appeal. The Court of Appeals cited no authority supporting its cryptic declaration that the conditional enforcement order was not ripe for appeal. We have found none. Indeed, prior to this case, the Ninth Circuit itself had twice upheld similar conditional enforcement orders. See United States v. Zolin, 809 F. 2d 1411, 1417 (CA9 1987); United States v. Author Servs., Inc., 804 F. 2d 1520, 1525­1526 (CA9 1986). In neither case did the Court of Appeals avoid the merits by interjecting the doctrine of ripeness. Aggrieved by the conditional enforcement upheld in Zolin, the United States petitioned this Court for a writ of certiorari. We granted the writ, 488 U. S. 907 (1988), and affirmed the Ninth Cir- cuit's ruling by an equally divided Court, 491 U. S. 554, 561 (1989). We hardly would have done so had we considered the matter unfit for review. 519US1$$6p 06-02-99 14:45:20 PAGES OPINPGT 58 UNITED STATES v. JOSE Per Curiam For the reasons stated, we grant the petition for a writ of certiorari, reverse the Ninth Circuit's judgment dismissing the appeal, and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. 519us1$$7Z 04-04-98 15:09:23 PAGES OPINPGT OCTOBER TERM, 1996 59 Per Curiam IN RE GAYDOS on motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis No. 96­5831. Decided December 2, 1996 Petitioner seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis and requests this Court to issue a writ of mandamus. She has been denied leave to pro- ceed in forma pauperis 10 times and has filed at least 8 other petitions. Held: Petitioner's requests are denied. For the reasons discussed in Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (per cu- riam), the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions for cer- tiorari or for extraordinary writs in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless she pays the required docketing fee and submits her petition in compliance with this Court's Rule 33.1. Motion denied. Per Curiam. Pro se petitioner Maria L. Gaydos seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis and requests this Court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering (1) the Clerk of the District Court for the District of New Jersey to file her Freedom of Informa- tion Act (FOIA) lawsuit challenging this Court's orders in 10 previous cases in which Gaydos was denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis under this Court's Rule 39.8; * (2) the dis- qualification of William T. Walsh, Clerk of the District Court, and William K. Suter, Clerk of this Court; and (3) the issu- ance of summons under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. In the alternative, she asks this Court to exercise its original jurisdiction over her FOIA suit because her complaint con- cerns this Court's orders. We deny petitioner's requests. Petitioner is allowed until December 23, 1996, within which to pay the docketing fees required by Rule 38 and to submit her petition in compliance *Rule 39.8 provides: "If satisfied that a petition for a writ of certiorari, jurisdictional statement, or petition for an extraordinary writ . . . is frivo- lous or malicious, the Court may deny a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis." 519us1$$7h 04-04-98 15:09:23 PAGES OPINPGT 60 IN RE GAYDOS Stevens, J., dissenting with Rule 33.1. For the reasons discussed below, we direct the Clerk of the Court not to accept any further petitions for certiorari or for extraordinary writs in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless she first pays the docketing fee re- quired by Rule 38 and submits her petition in compliance with Rule 33.1. Petitioner has a history of frivolous, repetitive filings. She has been denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis 10 times, and she has filed at least 8 other petitions. This most recent petition is nearly incomprehensible, and alludes to, among other things, fraud by the staff of this Court and im- pending impeachment proceedings against Clerks Walsh and Suter in the House of Representatives. We also note that the relief she purports to seek has already been granted: The District Court docketed petitioner's FOIA complaint as Case No. 96­CV­42435 on September 9, 1996, and promptly dis- missed it "in its entirety" the following week. We enter the order barring future in forma pauperis filings for the reasons discussed in Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992). Because petitioner has limited her abuse of our processes to noncrimi- nal cases, we limit our sanction accordingly. It is so ordered. Justice Stevens, dissenting. For reasons previously stated, see Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1, 4 (1992), and cases cited, I respectfully dissent. 519US1$$8Z 06-02-99 15:06:02 PAGES OPINPGT OCTOBER TERM, 1996 61 Syllabus CATERPILLAR INC. v. LEWIS certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit No. 95­1263. Argued November 12, 1996-Decided December 10, 1996 Respondent Lewis, a Kentucky resident, commenced this civil action in Kentucky state court after sustaining personal injuries while operating a bulldozer. Asserting state-law claims, Lewis named as defendants both the manufacturer of the bulldozer-petitioner Caterpillar Inc., a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Illinois-and the company that serviced the bulldozer-Whayne Supply Company, a Kentucky corporation with its principal place of business in Kentucky. Liberty Mutual Insurance Group, a Massachusetts corporation with its principal place of business in that State, intervened as a plaintiff, assert- ing subrogation claims against both Caterpillar and Whayne Supply for workers' compensation benefits Liberty Mutual had paid to Lewis on behalf of his employer. Shortly after learning of a settlement agree- ment between Lewis and Whayne Supply, Caterpillar filed a notice of removal in Federal District Court, grounding federal jurisdiction on di- versity of citizenship, see 28 U. S. C. § 1332. The notice explained that the case was nonremovable at the lawsuit's start: Complete diversity was absent then because plaintiff Lewis and defendant Whayne Supply shared Kentucky citizenship. Caterpillar assumed that the settlement agreement between these two parties would result in Whayne Supply's dismissal from the lawsuit, yielding complete diversity and rendering the case removable. Lewis promptly moved to remand the case to state court, asserting that diversity was defeated by Whayne Supply's contin- uing presence as a defendant due to Liberty Mutual's subrogation claim against it. The District Court denied the motion, erroneously conclud- ing that diversity had become complete. Before trial, however, Liberty Mutual's subrogation claim against Whayne Supply was settled, and that defendant was dismissed as a party. Complete diversity thereafter existed. The case proceeded to trial, jury verdict, and judgment for Caterpillar. The Sixth Circuit vacated the judgment, concluding that, absent complete diversity at the time of removal, the District Court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Held: A district court's error in failing to remand a case improperly re- moved is not fatal to the ensuing adjudication if federal jurisdictional requirements are met at the time judgment is entered. Pp. 67­78. 519US1$$8Z 06-02-99 15:06:02 PAGES OPINPGT 62 CATERPILLAR INC. v. LEWIS Syllabus (a) The general-diversity statute, § 1332(a), authorizes federal court jurisdiction over cases in which the citizenship of each plaintiff is di- verse from the citizenship of each defendant. See Carden v. Arkoma Associates, 494 U. S. 185, 187. When a plaintiff files a state-court civil action over which the federal district courts would have original juris- diction based on diversity of citizenship, the defendant or defendants may remove the action to federal court, § 1441(a), provided that no defendant "is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought," § 1441(b). In a case not originally removable from state court, a de- fendant who receives a pleading or other paper indicating the post- commencement satisfaction of federal jurisdictional requirements-e. g., by reason of a nondiverse party's dismissal-may remove the case to federal court within 30 days. § 1446(b). No case, however, may be re- moved based on diversity "more than 1 year after commencement of the action." Ibid. Once a defendant has filed a notice of removal in the federal court, a plaintiff objecting to removal "on the basis of any defect in removal procedure" may, within 30 days, file a motion to remand the case to state court. § 1447(c). This 30-day limit does not apply, how- ever, to jurisdictional defects: "If at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded." Ibid. Pp. 67­69. (b) American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Finn, 341 U. S. 6, and Grubbs v. General Elec. Credit Corp., 405 U. S. 699, are key cases in point and tend in Caterpillar's favor. Each suggests that the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction at time of judgment may shield a judgment against later jurisdictional attack despite an improper removal. Finn, 341 U. S., at 16; Grubbs, 405 U. S., at 700. However, neither decision resolves dispositively a controversy of the kind here at issue, for neither involved a plaintiff who moved promptly, but unsuccessfully, to remand a case improperly removed from state court to federal court, and then challenged on appeal a judgment entered by the federal court. Pp. 70­73. (c) Beyond question, as Lewis acknowledges, diversity became com- plete in this case when Whayne Supply was formally dismissed as a party. Nevertheless, Caterpillar moves too quickly in claiming that elimination of the jurisdictional defect before trial also cured a statu- tory flaw-Caterpillar's failure to meet the § 1441(a) requirement that the case be fit for federal adjudication at the time the removal petition was filed. By timely moving for remand, Lewis did all that was neces- sary to preserve his objection to removal. An order denying a motion to remand, "standing alone," is "obviously . . . not final and [immediately] appealable" as of right, Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. Stude, 346 U. S. 574, 519US1$$8Z 06-02-99 15:06:02 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 61 (1996) 63 Syllabus 578, and a plaintiff is not required to take an interlocutory appeal pursu- ant to 28 U. S. C. § 1292(b) in order to avoid waiving whatever ultimate appeal right he may have. Having preserved his objection, Lewis urges that ultimate satisfaction of the subject-matter jurisdiction re- quirement ought not swallow up antecedent statutory violations. Lewis' arguments in support of this position are hardly meritless, but they run up against an overriding consideration. Once a diversity case has been tried in federal court, with rules of decision supplied by state law under the regime of Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U. S. 64, considera- tions of finality, efficiency, and economy become overwhelming. Cf., e. g., Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U. S. 826, 836. This view is in harmony with a main theme of the removal scheme devised by Congress, which calls for expeditious superintendence by district courts. In this case, no jurisdictional defect lingered through judgment in the District Court. To wipe out the adjudication postjudgment, and return to state court a case now satisfying all federal jurisdictional re- quirements, would impose an exorbitant cost on our dual court system, a cost incompatible with the fair and unprotracted administration of justice. Pp. 73­77. (d) Lewis' prediction that rejection of his petition will provide state- court defendants with an enormous incentive to attempt unlawful re- movals rests on an assumption this Court does not indulge-that federal district courts generally will not comprehend, or will balk at applying, the removal rules Congress has prescribed. The prediction further- more assumes defendants' readiness to gamble that any jurisdictional defect, for example, the absence of complete diversity, will first escape detection, then disappear prior to judgment. This Court is satisfied that the well-advised defendant will foresee the likely outcome of an unwarranted removal-a swift and nonreviewable remand order, see §§ 1447(c), (d), attended by the displeasure of a district court whose authority has been improperly invoked. Pp. 77­78. Reversed and remanded. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Kenneth S. Geller argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Michael R. Feagley, John E. Muench, Charles Rothfeld, Leslie W. Morris II, James B. Buda, and William F. Maready. 519US1$$8Z 06-02-99 15:06:02 PAGES OPINPGT 64 CATERPILLAR INC. v. LEWIS Opinion of the Court Leonard J. Stayton argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Paul Alan Levy and Alan B. Morrison.* Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court. This case, commenced in a state court, involves personal injury claims arising under state law. The case was re- moved to a federal court at a time when, the Court of Ap- peals concluded, complete diversity of citizenship did not exist among the parties. Promptly after the removal, the plaintiff moved to remand the case to the state court, but the District Court denied that motion. Before trial of the case, however, all claims involving the nondiverse defendant were settled, and that defendant was dismissed as a party to the action. Complete diversity thereafter existed. The case proceeded to trial, jury verdict, and judgment for the removing defendant. The Court of Appeals vacated the judgment, concluding that, absent complete diversity at the time of removal, the District Court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. The question presented is whether the absence of complete diversity at the time of removal is fatal to federal-court adju- dication. We hold that a district court's error in failing to remand a case improperly removed is not fatal to the ensuing adjudication if federal jurisdictional requirements are met at the time judgment is entered. I Respondent James David Lewis, a resident of Kentucky, filed this lawsuit in Kentucky state court on June 22, 1989, after sustaining injuries while operating a bulldozer. As- serting state-law claims based on defective manufacture, negligent maintenance, failure to warn, and breach of war- *Patrick W. Lee filed a brief for the Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., as amicus curiae urging reversal. 519US1$$8p 06-02-99 15:06:02 PAGES OPINPGT Cite as: 519 U. S. 61 (1996) 65 Opinion of the Court ranty, Lewis named as defendants both the manufacturer of the bulldozer-petitioner Caterpillar Inc., a Delaware corpo- ration with its principal place of business in Illinois-and the company that serviced the bulldozer-Whayne Supply Company, a Kentucky corporation with its principal place of business in Kentucky. Several months later, Liberty Mutual Insurance Group, the insurance carrier for Lewis' employer, intervened in the lawsuit as a plaintiff. A Massachusetts corporation with its principal place of business in that State, Liberty Mutual asserted subrogation claims against both Caterpillar and Whayne Supply for workers' compensation benefits Liberty Mutual had paid to Lewis on behalf of his employer. Lewis entered into a settlement agreement with defendant Whayne Supply less than a year after filing his complaint. Shortly a