Wilson v. Corcoran, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2010) (per curiam)
R001; No. 10-91; 11/8/10. A federal court may issue a writ of habeas corpus to a state prisoner only for a violation of federal law; thus, the Seventh Circuit erred in granting the writ to respondent for a violation of state law.
|
Abbott v. United States, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2010)
R002; No. 09-479; 11/15/10. A defendant is subject to the highest mandatory minimum specified for his conduct in 18 U. S. C. §924(c)—which makes it an offense to use, carry, or possess a deadly weapon in connection with a violent or drug-trafficking crime—unless another provision of law directed to conduct proscribed by §924(c) imposes an even greater mandatory minimum.
|
Los Angeles County v. Humphries, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2010)
R003; No. 09-350; 11/30/10. The requirement making municipalities liable under 42 U. S. C. §1983 only "when execution of [their] policy or custom . . . inflicts the injury," Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs., 436 U. S. 658, 694, applies irrespective of whether the relief sought is monetary or prospective.
|
Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Omega, S. A., 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2010) (per curiam)
R004; No. 08-1423; 12/13/10. Judgment affirmed by equally divided Court.
|
Madison County v. Oneida Indian Nation of N. Y., 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011) (per curiam)
R005; No. 10-72; 1/10/11. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for the Second Circuit to address whether to revisit its ruling in light of respondent's recently passed declaration and ordinance waiving tribal sovereign immunity to enforcement of real property taxation through foreclosure by state, county, and local governments.
|
Mayo Foundation for Medical Ed. and Research v. United States, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011)
R006; No. 09-837; 1/11/11. The Treasury Department’s full-time employee rule—which does not categorize medical residents as students exempt from Federal Insurance Contributions Act taxes—is a reasonable construction of 26 U. S. C. §3121(b)(10).
|
Ransom v. FIA Card Services, N. A., 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011)
R007; No. 09-907; 1/11/11. A debtor under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code may not deduct car-ownership costs from his disposable income if he is not making loan or lease payments.
|
Harrington v. Richter, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011)
R008; No. 09-587; 1/19/11. Title 28 U. S. C. §2254(d) —which limits federal habeas relief for claims previously "adjudicated on the merits" in state court—applies to Richter's petition, even though the California Supreme Court issued only a summary denial; Richter was not entitled to habeas relief based on an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.
|
Premo v. Moore, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011)
R009; No. 09-658; 1/19/11. Moore was not entitled to habeas relief based on his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.
|
NASA v. Nelson, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011)
R010; No. 09-530; 1/19/11. Assuming, without deciding, that the Government’s inquiries in this case implicate a privacy interest of constitutional significance, that interest, whatever its scope, does not prevent the Government from asking reasonable questions in an employment background investigation that is subject to the Privacy Act’s safeguards against public disclosure.
|
Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011)
R011; No. 09-291; 1/24/11. If respondent fired Thompson to retaliate against his fiancée for filing an employment discrimination charge against respondent, Thompson’s firing constituted unlawful retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Title VII grants Thompson a cause of action.
|
Ortiz v. Jordan, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011)
R012; No. 09-737; 1/21/11. A party may not appeal a denial of summary judgment after a federal district court has conducted a full trial on the merits.
|
Chase Bank USA, N. A. v. McCoy, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011)
R013; No. 09-329; 1/24/11. At the time of the transactions at issue, the Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation Z did not require Chase to notify McCoy of an interest-rate increase instituted pursuant to their credit card agreement, which permitted Chase to raise the interest rate, up to a pre-set maximum, following delinquency or default.
|
Swarthout v. Cooke, 562 U. S. 1 ___ (2011) (per curiam)
R014; No. 10-333; 1/24/11. The Ninth Circuit erred in granting habeas relief based on its conclusion that the California courts had misapplied the State’s “some evidence” rule in determining respondents’ suitability for parole.
|