SWOYER
v.
KERCHER ET AL.; SWOYER V. MERCHANTS BANK; SWOYER V. REED; BAEZ V. HALL ET AL.; SWOYER V. EDGARS ET AL.; JARAMILLO V. PINKERTON ET AL.; YON V. MOORE, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FULTON COUNTY; GEORGIA, ET AL. V. FLANIGAN'S ENTERPRISES, INC. OF GEORGIA, ET AL.; BELL, WARDEN V. CONE; KRILICH V. UNITED STATES; WATTS V. CITY OF NORMAN; BARNETT V. DENVER PUBLISHING CO., DBA ROCKY MOUNTAIN NEWS, INC.; SPANAGEL V. SUPPORTIVE CARE SERVICES, INC.; SMITH V. FRIEDMAN ET AL.; SIENKIEWICZ V. HART ET AL.; HAGENBUCH ET AL. V. COMPAQ COMPUTER CORP. ET AL.; BROWN V. CITY OF WILMINGTON ET AL.; SUDARSKY V. CITY OF NEW YORK ET AL.; HICKS V. SNYDER, WARDEN; TAYBORN V. SCOTT, WARDEN; MITCHELL V. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY; MORENO V. METHODIST HOSPITALS, INC.; HEDRICK V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; MANLEY V. INDIANA; BEN YISRAYL, AKA CANNON V. NORRIS, DIRECTOR, ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION; DAVIS V. DAVIS; OSAYANDE V. UNITED STATES; BARREIRO V. UNITED STATES; ROWELL V. NEVADA; ABDULLAH V. UNITED STATES; TEAGUE V. HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS ET AL.; COOK V. ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL.; MORRIS V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION (TWO JUDGMENTS); BANKS V. HORN, COMMISSIONER, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL.; METTS V. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE; DUBOSE V. KELLY ET AL.; HORNER V. COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; MENCHACA V. BUTLER, CHIEF DEPUTY WARDEN, ET AL.; TSHIWALA V. MARYLAND; WILLIAMS V. UNITED STATES; MANLEY V. MONROE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT ET AL.; DOERR V. CITY OF REDLANDS ET AL.; COLE V. CARR ET AL.; TAYLOR V. REDDISH, WARDEN; HEGWOOD V. MOORE, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; NABELEK V. TEXAS (TWO JUDGMENTS), IN RE WILLIAMS, VIVONE V. KEMNA, SUPERINTENDENT, CROSSROADS CORRECTIONAL CENTER; JONES V. LUEBBERS, SUPERINTENDENT, POTOSI CORRECTIONAL CENTER, IN RE NABELEK (THREE JUDGMENTS), CHAMBERS V. TURLEY ET AL.; TRICE V. HALL, WARDEN; MCDOWELL V. CORNELL CORRECTIONS ET AL.; MOULTRIE V. UNITED STATES; BURNETT V. TENET HEALTHSYSTEM HOSPITALS, INC., DBA LUTHERAN MEDICAL CENTER; CARROLL V. PFEFFER; DEAVAULT V. UNITED STATES; NATERA-SOSA V. UNITED STATES; ABDUR'RAHMAN V. TENNESSEE; MCCOY V. INDIANA; NIXON V. UNITED STATES; MEJIAS NEGRON V. UNITED STATES; NICOLAISON V. MILCZART ET AL.; MARCELLO ET UX. V. MAINE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES; ASHTON V. UNITED STATES; ARMSTRONG V. CITY OF GREENSBORO ET AL.; WILLIAMS V. UNITED STATES; HOLUB V. UNITED STATES; NAGY V. UNITED STATES; BLACKBURN V. ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL.; DIX V. UNITED STATES; LOCKETT V. UNITED STATES

U.S. | 2002-08-05
Nos. 00-9545; No. 00-9551; No. 00-9554; No. 00-9686; No. 00-9726; No. 00-10271; No. 00-10422; No. 01-144; No. 01-400; No. 01-1277; No. 01-1299; No. 01-1367; No. 01-1379; No. 01-1391; No. 01-1430; No. 01-1448; No. 01-1526; No. 01-1539; No. 01-5074; No. 01-6035; No. 01-7219; No. 01-7844; No. 01-7926; No. 01-8315; No. 01-8404; No. 01-8431; No. 01-8445; No. 01-8596; No. 01-8809; No. 01-8823; No. 01-8828; No. 01-8832; No. 01-8843; No. 01-8875; No. 01-8911; No. 01-8970; No. 01-8983; No. 01-9045; No. 01-9050; No. 01-9059; No. 01-9071; No. 01-9075; No. 01-9083; No. 01-9108; No. 01-9160; No. 01-9180; No. 01-9223; No. 01-9257; No. 01-9274; No. 01-9283; No. 01-9327; No. 01-9391; No. 01-9393; No. 01-9416; No. 01-9437; No. 01-9475; No. 01-9502; No. 01-9507; No. 01-9532; No. 01-9566; No. 01-9567; No. 01-9619; No. 01-9624; No. 01-9663; No. 01-9682; No. 01-9731; No. 01-9819; No. 01-9832; No. 01-9884; No. 01-10013; No. 01-10094; No. 01-10166
536 U.S. 976 Supreme Court of the United States (2002) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Supreme Court denied petitions for rehearing in a comprehensive list of cases involving diverse legal matters spanning criminal justice, administrative law, employment disputes, and civil rights, covering issues such as wrongful imprisonment claims, constitutional challenges to state agency actions, and federal criminal matters.


© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court

534 U. S. 831; 534 U. S. 831; 534 U. S. 832; 535 U. S. 904; 534 U. S. 832; 534 U. S. 849; 534 U. S. 857; ante, p. 904; 535 U. S. 685; ante, p. 904; 535 U. S. 1055; 535 U. S. 1056; 535 U. S. 1078; 535 U. S. 1057; 535 U. S. 1097; 535 U. S. 1112; ante, p. 906; ante, p. 918; 534 U. S. 901; 534 U. S. 965; 535 U. S. 933; 535 U. S. 957; 535 U. S. 959; 535 U. S. 998; 535 U. S. 1001; 535 U. S. 1020; 535 U. S. 962; 535 U. S. 1099; No. 01-8809. No. 01-8823. No. 01-8828. No. 01-8832. No. 01-8843. No. 01-8875. No. 01-8911. No. 01-8970. No. 01-8983. No. 01-9045. No. 01-9050. No. 01-9059. No. 01-9071. No. 01-9075. No. 01-9083. No. 01-9108. No. 01-9160. No. 01-9180. No. 01-9223. No. 01-9257. No. 01-9274. No. 01-9283. No. 01-9327. No. 01-9391. 535 U. S. 1060; 535 U. S. 1004; 535 U. S. 1061; 535 U. S. 1024; 535 U. S. 1061; 535 U. S. 1099; 535 U. S. 1062; 535 U. S. 1064; 535 U. S. 1080; 535 U. S. 1082; 535 U. S. 1065; 535 U. S. 1010; 535 U. S. 1082;

535 U. S. 1100; 535 U. S. 1101; 535 U. S. 1077; 535 U. S. 1086; 535 U. S. 1066; 535 U. S. 1103; 535 U. S. 1114; 535 U. S. 1116; No. 01-9393. No. 01-9416. No. 01-9437. No. 01-9475. No. 01-9502. No. 01-9507. No. 01-9532. No. 01-9566. No. 01-9567. No. 01-9619. No. 01-9624. No. 01-9663. No. 01-9682. No. 01-9731. No. 01-9819. No. 01-9832. No. 01-9884. No. 01-10013. No. 01-10094. No. 01-10166. 535 U. S. 1116; 535 U. S. 1067; 535 U. S. 1104; ante, p. 907; 535 U. S. 1069; 535 U. S. 1069; 535 U. S. 1070; ante, p. 925; 535 U. S. 1071; 535 U. S. 1086; ante, p. 910; ante, p. 920; 535 U. S. 1087; ante, p. 930; 535 U. S. 1106; 535 U. S. 1090; 535 U. S. 1107; ante, p. 911; ante, p. 913; and ante, p. 915. Petitions for rehearing denied.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Red-Eyed Jack, Inc. v. City of Daytona Beach, 322 F. Supp. 2d 1361 (M.D. Fla. 2004)
    …Flanigan’s Enters., Inc. of Ga. v. Fulton County, Ga., 242 F.3d 976, 982 (11th Cir.), reh’g and reh’g en banc denied, 254 F.3d 77 (11th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 536 U.S. 904, 122 S.Ct. 2356, 153 L.Ed.2d 178, and reh’g denied, 536 U.S. 976, 123 S.Ct. 2, 153 L.Ed.2d 866 (2002). “For First Amendment purposes, courts treat zoning ordinances regulating adult businesses as time, place, or manner restrictions.” David Vincent, Inc., v. Broward County, Fla., 200 F.3d 1325, 1333 (11th Ci…

Authorities Cited (99 total)

View all 99 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw