author: Justice Rehnquist,

text:
    February 28, 1983
    Maryland et al. v. United States et al.; Tandy Corp. v. United States et al.; North American Telephone Assn. v. United States et al.; and Illinois v. United States et al.
    No. 82-952.
    No. 82-953.
    No. 82-992.
    No. 82-1001.
   Affirmed on appeals from D. C. D. C. Reported below: 552 F. Supp. 131.

Justice Rehnquist,

with whom The Chief Justice and Justice White join, dissenting.

These consolidated cases raise questions concerning the settlement of a civil antitrust suit brought by the United States against American Telephone & Telegraph Co. (AT&T). In January 1982, the parties announced a settlement in the form of a consent decree. The proposed settlement was filed in the District Court for the District of Columbia, which ordered the start of procedures provided for in § 2 of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 88 Stat. 1706, 15 U. S. C. § 16(b) et seq. (Act).

The Act provides:

“Before entering any consent judgment proposed by the United States under this section, the court shall determine that the entry of such judgment is in the public interest.” 15 U. S. C. § 16(e).

The District Court issued a lengthy opinion discussing the proposed decree. 552 F. Supp. 131 (1982). It found that most of the decree’s provisions were in the public interest, but stated that it would not approve the decree unless the parties agreed to several changes. The parties acquiesced, and the District Court then approved and entered the amended decree and a final judgment dismissing the case.

The District Court allowed appellants to intervene for purposes of appealing the final judgment and certified their appeals for immediate consideration by this Court under the Expediting Act, 15 U. S. C. § 29(b).

In Nos. 82-952 and 82-1001, several States contend that the decree improperly pre-empts state regulation of the telephone industry. They contend their regulation of the industry is “state action” which is exempt from the Sherman Act under Parker v. Brown, 317 U. S. 341 (1943). Thus they do not appear to challenge the conclusion that this consent decree is in the public interest; they claim that the District Court lacked the authority to override state law by entering this consent decree.

The District Court reasoned that “[s]ince the conduct which is the subject of these lawsuits is . . . well within the jurisdiction of the federal antitrust laws ... it would make no sense to hold that, in providing a remedy for anticompetitive conduct, the Court must refrain from interfering with state regulation,” and “[t]he same rationale applies to ... a consent decree.” 552 F. Supp., at 158, and n. 111. Iam troubled by the notion that a district court, by entering what is in essence a private agreement between parties to a lawsuit, invokes the Supremacy Clause powers of the Federal Government to pre-empt state regulatory laws. The District Court may well be correct, but I am not prepared to create a precedent in this Court by summarily affirming its decision. This is particularly true when it is not at all clear whether the summary affirmance disposes of the merits of the States’ contentions.

In No. 82-953, a competitor of AT&T argues that the District Court should not have eliminated a requirement that Western Electric license its patents for a reasonable royalty to anyone who applies. It also contends that AT&T should not have been permitted to sell telephones through its Phone Center Stores because competitors, especially local telephone companies, will not be able to compete effectively. In No. 82-992, by contrast, an association of telephone manufacturers,, does not object to permitting AT&T to sell telephones, but insists that local telephone companies should not be permitted to do so. These appellants do challenge the District Court’s conclusion that this settlement is in the public interest.

In order to review the determination that a settlement is in the public interest, it is first necessary to know what “the public interest” means. The Act itself is not very helpful. It does state that “the court may consider—

“(1) the competitive impact of such judgment, including termination of alleged violations, provisions for enforcement and modification, duration or [sic] relief sought, anticipated effects of alternative remedies actually considered, and any other considerations bearing upon the adequacy of such judgment;
“(2) the impact of entry of such judgment upon the public generally and individuals alleging specific injury from the violations set forth in the complaint including consideration of the public benefit, if any, to be derived from a determination of the issues at trial.” 88 Stat. 1707, 15 U. S. C. § 16(e) (emphasis supplied).

The legislative history reveals that the sponsors of the Act were concerned that the Department of Justice had settled some civil antitrust cases on what they believed to have been unfavorable terms. Senator Tunney spoke of several “blatantly inequitable and improper antitrust settlements.” 119 Cong. Rec. 24598 (1973). The Act appears to have been intended to prevent the Department of Justice from settling civil antitrust cases on terms less favorable than Congress thought it should obtain.

Faced with this paucity of guidance, the District Court undertook to “defin[e] the public interest in accordance with the antitrust laws.” 552 F. Supp., at 149. It noted that, because it was dealing with a settlement, it “is not as free to exercise its discretion in fashioning a remedy as it would be upon a finding of liability.” Id., at 151. It thought it should approve the settlement “even if it falls short of the remedy the court would impose on its own, as long as it falls within the range of acceptability or is ‘within the reaches of public interest.’” Ibid., quoting United States v. Gillette Co., 406 F. Supp. 713, 716 (Mass. 1975). The District Court summarized the proper standard as follows:

“After giving due weight to the decisions of the parties as expressed in the proposed decree, the Court will attempt to harmonize competitive values with other legitimate public interest factors. If the decree meets the requirements for an antitrust remedy — that is, if it effectively opens the relevant markets to competition and prevents the recurrence of anticompetitive activity, all without imposing undue and unnecessary burdens upon other aspects of the public interest — it will be approved.” 552 F. Supp., at 153 (footnote omitted).

It is not clear to me that this standard, or any other standard the District Court could have devised, admits of resolution by a court exercising the judicial power established by Art. Ill of the Constitution. The Act applies only when a case has been settled. Thus, by definition, there has been no judicial finding of relevant markets, closed or otherwise, to be opened or of anticompetitive activity to be prevented. The District Court seems to have assumed first that there was an antitrust violation and second that it knew the scope and effects of the violation. But the parties have settled the case and thereby avoided the necessity for such findings.

Even if this problem could be put aside, the case remains problematic at best. Representative Hutchinson, who was a member of the House Committee that considered the Act, stated on the House floor that it

“imposes on the courts what is essentially a nonjudicial function. In short, the courts will have to decide whether the Department of Justice has exercised its prosecutorial discretion to settle antitrust cases as well as it should. ... In my opinion, such a process is foreign to the judicial function.” 120 Cong. Rec. 36340 (1974).

In an addendum to the Committee Report, Representative Hutchinson stated that the defect of the Act

“is simply that to require federal courts to determine whether a consent decree is in the public interest is to transfer an ‘executive’ question to the courts for resolution. The question for the court will be whether the Department of Justice has exercised its prosecutorial discretion well or, perhaps, as well as possible. The question will not be whether the Department has violated some legal standard. For none is established by this legislation. Rather, the court is given a plenary and unqualified authority to re-decide an executive decision.” H. R. Rep. No. 93-1463, p. 21 (1974) (Additional Views of Mr. Hutchinson) (emphasis in original).

I believe this point is well taken. The question assigned to the district courts by the Act is a classic example of a question committed to the Executive. “The province of the court is, solely, to decide on the rights of individuals, not to inquire how the executive, or executive officers, perform duties in which they have a discretion.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 170 (1803). In Baker v. Carr, 369 U. S. 186, 217 (1962), the Court listed six alternative ways of identifying a political question that is beyond the competence of the Judiciary. Three of these apply to these cases: “a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for discovering it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion.” Ibid.

The question whether to prosecute a lawsuit is a question of the execution of the laws, which is committed to the Executive by Art. II. There is no standard by which the benefits to the public from a “better” settlement of a lawsuit than the Justice Department has negotiated can be balanced against the risk of an adverse decision, the need for a speedy resolution of the case, the benefits obtained in the settlement, and the availablility of the Department’s resources for other cases. How is a court to decide whether a better settlement in a case involving one industry is more important to the public than the benefits that might be gained by immediately working on an antitrust problem in another industry? Finally, the decision requires an evaluation of an initial policy decision — whether the benefits that might be obtained in a lawsuit are worth the risks and costs — that is clearly for nonjudicial discretion.

In short, the language of the Court in Green v. Frazier, 253 U. S. 233, 240 (1920), seems fully applicable here: “Questions of policy are not submitted to judicial determination, and the courts have no general authority of supervision over the exercise of discretion which under our system is reposed in the people or other branches of government.” Even though Congress may by statute impose such a duty on the federal courts, they may not perform it. Muskrat v. United States, 219 U. S. 346 (1911).

Because I am concerned about the implications of the Court’s decision in Nos. 82-952 and 82-1001, and because it is not clear to me whether the determination sought to be reviewed in Nos. 82-953 and 82-992 is within the judicial power, I would set these appeals for oral argument and postpone the further consideration of the question of jurisdiction to the hearing of the case on the merits.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    No. 82-1175.
    Berg v. Wisconsin et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Wis. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-1279.
    Jensen v. Satran, Warden, North Dakota State Penitentiary, et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 8th Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certio-rari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1296.
    Stroom v. Carter.
   Appeal from D. C. D. C. dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


text:
    No. 82-174.
    H. S. Crocker Co., Inc. v. Ostrofe.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. Carpenters, 459 U. S. 519 (1983).


text:
    No. 82-178.
    Mitsui & Co., Ltd., et al. v. Industrial Investment Development Corp. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. Carpenters, 459 U. S. 519 (1983).


text:
    No. 82-999.
    Chemetron Corp. v. Business Funds, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Herman & MacLean v. Huddleston, 459 U. S. 375 (1983).


text:
    No.-.
    Loveless et al. v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., et al.
   Motion of petitioners to direct the Clerk to file the petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.


text:
    No. D-279.
    In re Disbarment of Resnick.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 458 U. S. 1125.]


text:
    No. D-280.
    In re Disbarment of Stern.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 458 U. S. 1126.]


text:
    No. D-293.
    In re Disbarment of Doyle.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 939.]


text:
    No. D-295.
    In re Disbarment of Moyer.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 939.]


text:
    No. D-298.
    In re Disbarment of Burger.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 940.]


text:
    No. D-302.
    In re Disbarment of Johnson.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 985.]


text:
    No. D-304.
    In re Disbarment of McConnell.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 1083.]


text:
    No. D-306.
    In re Disbarment of Phillips.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 1083.]


text:
    No. D-314.
    In re Disbarment of Molovinsky.
   It is ordered that Gale S. Molovinsky, of Potomac, Md., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-317.
    In re Disbarment of Mack.
   It is ordered that Ollie R. Mack, Jr., of Philadelphia, Pa., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-318.
    In re Disbarment of Kops.
   It is ordered

that Floyd J. Kops, of New York, N. Y., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-319.
    In re Disbarment of Feder.
   It is ordered that Alan Jerome Feder, of Chicago, Ill., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-320.
    In re Disbarment of Rubenstein.
   It is ordered that J. Mortimer Rubenstein, of Cliffside Park, N. J., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-321.
    In re Disbarment of Friedland.
   It is ordered that M. Daniel Friedland, of Hartford, Conn., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-322.
    In re Disbarment of Minn.
   It is ordered that Howard W. Minn, of Chicago, Ill., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No D-323.
    In re Disbarment of Sherman.
   It is ordered that Robert Stephen Sherman, of Baltimore, Md., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. 81-430.
    Illinois v. Gates et ux.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. [Certiorari granted, 454 U. S. 1140.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to file reply brief as amicus curiae denied.


text:
    No. 81-2159.
    Silkwood, Administrator of the Estate of Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp. et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction postponed, 459 U. S. 1101.] Motion of the parties to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.


text:
    No. 82-849.
    United States v. Mendoza.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1169.] Motion of the parties to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.


text:
    No. 82-1305.
    Blackstone Co. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Motion of petitioner to consolidate this case with No. 82-168, National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp. [certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1014], denied.


text:
    No. 82-6080.
    Barefoot v. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certio-rari granted, 459 U. S. 1169.] Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis granted.


text:
    No. 82-6181.
    No. 82-6182.
    In re Ross; and In re Patterson.
   Petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 82-6033.
    In re Reiter.
   Petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 82-912.
    Federal Communications Commission v. League of Women Voters of California et al.
   Appeal from D. C. C. D. Cal. Further consideration of question of jurisdiction postponed to hearing of case on the merits. Reported below: 547 F. Supp. 379.


text:
    No. 82-973.
    Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Stevic.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted. Reported below: 678 F. 2d 401.


text:
    No. 82-914.
    Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari granted. Justice White took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 81-1389.
    Goldenberg v. United States (two cases).
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-1392.
    Winter v. United States (two cases).
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-1394.
    Price v. United States (two cases).
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-6152.
    Campbell v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-6593.
    Burrows v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-949.
    Fricke v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-954.
    Keckeisen v. United States; Pfeffer v. United States; and Buchanan v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1046.
    Kane Gas Light & Heating Co. v. International Brotherhood of Firemen & Oilers, Local 112.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1081.
    Estate of Frieders v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1086.
    Groom v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1106.
    Stine v. Cross.
   Super. Ct. Pa. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1107.
    Parks, an Individual, and as Natural Mother, Guardian, and Next Friend of Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1111.
    Harrell, by her Parents, Harrell et ux. v. Wilson County Schools et al.
   Ct. App. N. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1112.
    Kline v. City of Fairfax, Virginia.
   Sup. Ct. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1114.
    Rose, as Next Friend of Rose v. Nebraska et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1117.
    Jamroch v. Finley, Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, et al.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1119.
    Willis v. Muse et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1124.
    Taylor et al. v. Tracor Marine, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1132.
    Saldana v. Garza et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1133.
    Lowenthal et al. v. Rome, Personal Representative of the Estate of Lowenthal, et al.
   Ct. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1138.
    Volvo of America Corp. et al. v. Rosack.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1142.
    Sharon Steel Corp. et al. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A., et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1149.
    Marquez v. University of Washington et al.
   Ct. App. Wash. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1165.
    Corder et al. v. Kirksey, Probate Judge of Pickens County, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1168.
    Monaco, an Infant, by his Parent and Natural Guardian, Monaco, et al. v. Feiner et al.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1178.
    Rood v. Finney et al.
   Ct. App. La., 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1179.
    Cannon v. University of Chicago et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1201.
    Bintliff v. Chemetron Corp.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1291.
    Rentz v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5249.
    Tweety v. Mitchell, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5560.
    Hamann v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5597.
    Turner v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5719.
    Clarkson v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5737.
    Lipscomb v. King.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5771.
    Zissimos v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5774.
    Davis v. United States Steel Supply, Division of United States Steel Corp.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5822.
    Kinion v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5830.
    Tirado, aka Dante v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5838.
    Smith v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill, 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5852.
    Gottesman v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5873.
    Edwards v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5963.
    Carter v. United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6000.
    Brant v. Wisconsin.
   Ct. App. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6004.
    Mazur v. Chevrolet Motor Division, Saginaw Metal Casting Plants, General Motors Corp.
   Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6006.
    McCrary v. Smith, Superintendent, Attica Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6007.
    Pattashnick et ux. v. Tashoff.
   Ct. Sp. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6008.
    Sexton v. Maynard, Warden.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6009.
    Coffer v. Hess, Warden.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6017.
    Jaworski v. Powers.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6021.
    French v. De Robertis.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6026.
    Adams v. Carlson et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6032.
    Miller v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6039.
    Brooks v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6049.
    Holmes v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6069.
    McFadyen et al. v. Shure et al.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6082.
    Duffle v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6118.
    Adair v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6123.
    Hayes v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6140.
    Lebedun v. Petrovsky, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6143.
    Slocum v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6162.
    Guilbert v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-18.
    Balkcom, Warden v. Mason.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-584.
    Jones, Superintendent, Great Meadow Correctional Facility v. Ramirez.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-116.
    Greater Washington Central Labor Council v. District of Columbia et al.; and Food & Allied Services Trade Council of Metropolitan Washington v. District of Columbia et al.
    No. 82-146.
   Ct. App. D. C. Motion of Greater Washington Board of Trade for leave to intervene as a party respondent denied. Alternative request to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-493.
    Bichan v. Chemetron Corp. et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied. Justice Blackmun would grant certiorari, vacate the judgment, and remand the case for further consideration in light of Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. Carpenters, 459 U. S. 519 (1983).


text:
    No. 82-877.
    Bonanno v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of Jack DiFilippi for leave to join in petition for writ of certiorari denied. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-959.
    Florida v. Kilpatrick et al.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 1st Dist. Motion of respondents for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1104.
    General Atomic Co. v. United Nuclear Corp.
   Sup. Ct. N. M. Motion of petitioner to substitute GA Technologies, Inc., as party petitioner denied. Certio-rari denied.

Justice Brennan and Justice Blackmun would grant certiorari.


author: Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall,

text:
    No. 82-5977.
    No. 82-5987.
    No. 82-5989.
    Hill v. Florida. Richardson v. Alabama. Stokes v. Missouri.
   Sup. Ct. Fla.; Ct. Crira. App. Ala.; and Sup. Ct. Mo. Cer-tiorari denied. Reported below: No. 82-5977, 422 So. 2d 816; No. 82-5987, 419 So. 2d 289; No. 82-5989, 638 S. W. 2d 715.

Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall,

dissenting.

Adhering to our views that the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 227, 231 (1976), we would grant certiorari and vacate the death sentences in these cases.


text:
    No. 82-5995.
    Reed v. Georgia.
   Ct. App. Ga. Motion of petitioner to defer consideration of the petition for writ of certiorari denied. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-894.
    No. 82-5444.
    No. 82-5805.
    No. 82-5878.
    Mastro et al. v. United States, 459 U. S. 1108; Harvard v. Florida, 459 U. S. 1128; Engelke v. Shering, Judge of Justice Court, Clark County, Nevada, 459 U. S. 1150; and DiSilvestro v. United States, 459 U. S. 1177.
   Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    March 7, 1983
    No. 82-1098.
    Rodriguez v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services.
   Appeal from Ct. App. D. C. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6054.
    Becker v. Doran, Superintendent, California Rehabilitation Center.
   Appeal from C. A. 9th Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. A-664.
    Palmore v. Sidoti.
   Application to stay the mandate of the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, addressed to Justice Marshall and referred to the Court, denied.

Justice Stevens would grant the application.


text:
    No. A-678.
    Walker v. United States.
   D. C. E. D. Mich.

Application for stay, addressed to Justice Rehnquist and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-679.
    Cadle v. United States.
   D. C. E. D. Mich.

Application for stay, addressed to Justice Rehnquist and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-690.
    Hayfield Northern Railroad Co., Inc., et al. v. Chicago, Northwestern Transportation Co.
   C. A. 8th Cir.

Application for stay, addressed to Justice O’Connor and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-691.
    In re Carter et al.
   Bkrtcy. Ct. N. D.

Ga. Application for stay, addressed to Justice Marshall and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-707.
    Watson et al. v. United States et al.
   D. C. S. D. Tex.

Application for stay, addressed to Justice Marshall and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. D-324.
    In re Disbarment of Javitz.
   It is ordered that Marvin R. Javitz, of Brooklyn, N. Y., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-325.
    In re Disbarment of Hampares.
   It is ordered that A. James Hampares, of New York, N. Y., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-326.
    In re Disbarment of Galloway.
   It is ordered that John Michael Galloway, of Anderson, S. C., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-327.
    In re Disbarment of Stevens.
   It is ordered that Harry J. Stevens, Jr., of Allenhurst, N. J., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-328.
    In re Disbarment of Juncker.
   It is ordered that Martin Edward Juncker, of St. Louis, Mo., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. D-329.
    In re Disbarment of White.
   It is ordered that Paul Anthony White, of Gladstone, Mo., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. 93,
    Orig.
    Oklahoma v. Arkansas et al.
   Motion of Illinois and Tennessee for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Motion for leave to file bill of complaint denied. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 812.]


text:
    No. 82-65.
    Brown et al. v. Thomson, Secretary of State of Wyoming, et al.
   D. C. Wyo. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 459 U. S. 819.] Motion of appellees James L. Thompson et al. for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 82-118.
    Crown, Cork & Seal Co., Inc. v. Parker.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 986.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 82-524.
    Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. et al. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.; United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission et al. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al.; and Commonwealth Edison Co. et al. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al.
    No. 82-545.
    No. 82-551.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1034.] Motion of petitioners in No. 82-551 for divided argument denied. Justice Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


text:
    No. 82-914.
    Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp.
   C. A. 7th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 1010.] Motion of Washington et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae out of time denied.

Justice White took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


text:
    No. 82-6066.
    In re Roberts.
   Petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 81-2110.
    United Building & Construction Trades Council of Camden County and Vicinity v. Mayor and Council of the City of Camden et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. N. J. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 82-945.
    Sure-Tan, Inc., et al. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1127.
    Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall et al.
   Sup. Ct. Tex. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1167.
    United States v. Jacobsen et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1200.
    Daily Income Fund, Inc., et al. v. Fox.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1031.
    Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 et al. v. Hyde.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Motions of Louisiana Hospital Association and American Hospital Association for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-2355.
    United States v. Ionian Glow Marine, Inc.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-6922.
    Brock et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-86.
    Interstate Commerce Commission v. American Trucking Assns., Inc., et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-594.
    Interstate Commerce Commission v. Ritter Transportation, Inc., et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-814.
    Boffa v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-904.
    Constructora El Monte, S.A., et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-931.
    Day v. Texas.
   Ct. App. Tex., 1st Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-962.
    Thomas et al. v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-974.
    Thomassen et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1007.
    Nieszner v. Orr, Secretary of the Air Force.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1042.
    Sundheimer v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1152.
    Hoggard v. Arkansas.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1154.
    Borough of Sayreville et al. v. Middlesex County Utilities Authority et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1158.
    West v. West.
   Ct. App. Okla. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1161.
    Teamsters Local No. 243, Affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1182.
    Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Norman.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1185.
    Muir et al. v. Alabama Educational Television Commission et al.; and Barnstone et al. v. University of Houston, KUHT-TV, et al.
    No. 82-1196.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1189.
    United Transportation Union v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority et al.
   Sp. Ct. R. R. R. A. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1195.
    Meyer v. Thomson & McKinnon Auchincloss Kohlmeyer, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1205.
    Sawyer et al. v. Iranian Student Assn. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1218.
    Flowers Industries, Inc., et al. v. Brown et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1234.
    Parker, Individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Parker, et al. v. County of Nassau et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5182.
    Lyons v. California.
   App. Dept., Super. Ct. Cal., County of Santa Barbara. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5459.
    Devorce et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5716.
    Chandler v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5768.
    Lamb v. Jernigan, Warden.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5847.
    Krown v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5887.
    Mealer v. New York.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6001.
    Casareale et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6025.
    Giles v. Hunt et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6027.
    Lucien v. Fitzsimmons et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6036.
    Fitzgerald v. Penthouse International, Ltd., et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6041.
    Smith v. Wyrick, Warden.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6044.
    Martin v. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6045.
    McKinney v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Warren County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6046.
    Zimardo v. Washington.
   Ct. App. Wash. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6047.
    Endler v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6050.
    Burt v. Wainwright, Director, Florida Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6051.
    Baum et al. v. Estate of Gillman et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6056.
    Peppers v. New Jersey.
   Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6117.
    Brown v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6135.
    Stallworth v. Detroit Board of Education et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6139.
    Ready v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6153.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6171.
    Murray v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


author: Justice White,

text:
    No. 82-41.
    Interstate Commerce Commission v. Steere Tank Lines, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certio-rari denied.

Justice White,

with whom Justice Powell and Justice Rehnquist join, dissenting.

The Motor Carrier Act of 1980, 49 U. S. C. § 10101 et seq. (1976 ed., Supp. V), authorizes the Interstate Commerce Commission to lift restrictions on motor carriers’ existing authority where the removal would, among other things, “reasonably broaden the categories of property authorized by the carriers’ certificate or permit.” § 10922(h)(1)(B)(i). Pursuant to the statute, the Commission issued guidelines for processing restriction-removal applications. The guidelines invite carriers authorized to haul “one or more named commodities” to apply for a broader authorization, such as authority to transport “commodities in bulk.” 49 CFR § 1137.21(b) (1981).

In this case, Maxwell Co. applied to the Commission to broaden the commodity description in one of its existing certificates from “spent silica gel catalyst, in bulk” to “commodities in bulk.” After considering submissions from Maxwell, and comments filed by two carriers objecting to the proposed broadening, the Commission’s Restriction Removal Board concluded that the application should be granted. The Board found that the proposed broadening “will reduce the consumption of energy resources, will offer potential cost savings and improved efficiency, will enable applicant to provide full service to a broader range of shippers and in rural communities, and will be consistent with the [transportation policies of the Act].” The Commission denied internal appeal.

Steere Tank Lines, one of the objecting carriers, then challenged the Commission’s action in the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, arguing that the Commission’s guidelines were not valid under the Act. Relying on its earlier decision in American Trucking Assns., Inc. v. ICC, 659 F. 2d 452 (1981), cert. denied, ante, p. 1022, the court held that the Commission’s action was improper. 666 F. 2d 255 (1982). The Fifth Circuit maintained that the Commission’s guidelines fail to account for the Motor Carrier Act’s mandate that every carrier be “fit, willing, and able ... to provide the transportation to be authorized by the certificate.” 49 U. S. C. § 10922(a)(1) (1976 ed., Supp. V). Accordingly, the court remanded the decision in this case to the Commission for further proceedings.

The Commission now petitions for a writ of certiorari, claiming that the Court of Appeals has engrafted a requirement on restriction-removal proceedings not required or contemplated by Congress and that will impede the Commission’s ability to implement the policies of the Motor Carrier Act of 1980. In ruling upon such restriction-removal applications, the Commission is directed by the Act to consider “the impact of the proposed restriction removal upon the consumption of energy resources, potential cost savings and improved efficiency, and the transportation policy set forth in [the Act]” and to “give special consideration to providing and maintaining service to small and rural communities and small shippers.” 49 U. S. C. § 10922(h)(2) (1976 ed., Supp. V). The Act does not apply the “fit, willing, and able” requirement to applications for removal of service restrictions; this requirement is expressly applicable only to carriers seeking a new certificate. § 10922(b)(1)(A). In the Commission’s view, the result of the Court of Appeals’ decision is to render the restriction-removal process the equivalent of an application for new authority, frustrating Congress’ intent that restriction-removal applications be processed in a more simplified and expeditious manner.

I would grant certiorari in this case. Although another Circuit that has considered this issue has reached the same result, see Ritter Transportation, Inc. v. ICC, 221 U. S. App. D. C. 312, 684 F. 2d 86 (1982), cert. denied, ante, p. 1022, there is considerable force to the Commission’s argument that these decisions frustrate the will of Congress. Nor do I agree with respondents that it is too early to determine whether the Courts of Appeals’ decisions will substantially impair national transportation goals. The Commission itself is in the best position to speak to this matter. The Commission reports that its Restriction Removal Board, which regularly processed applications for expanded authority, has been closed down due to a lack of applications being filed. The Commission believes this is at least partially attributable to the “potential applicant’s perception that it is now easier to obtain a new certificate under Section 10922(b) than it is to obtain the expansion of an existing certificate in a restriction removal proceeding.” Reply Brief for Petitioner in ICC v. Ritter Transportation, Inc., O. T. 1982, No. 82-594, p. 2. It seems to me that the Courts of Appeals have sidetracked an entire regulatory program of the Commission and that plenary consideration is warranted at this time so that there may be an early judgment as to whether the Courts of Appeals have correctly read the statute.

      If certiorari were granted, I would hold the petitions filed by the Commission in ICC v. Ritter Transportation, Inc., No. 82-594, and ICC v. American Trucking Assns., Inc., No. 82-86, pending consideration of this case.


text:
    No. 82-227.
    Providence Journal Co. v. Home Placement Service, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Motion of American Newspaper Publishers Association for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-869.
    Froude et al. v. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Motions of American Home Assurance Co. et al., Insurance Company of North America, and Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. Certiorari denied. Justice Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions and this petition.


text:
    No. 82-878.
    Kalmar v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Motion of petitioner for waiver of time requirement granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1097.
    Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Motion of Insurance Company of North America for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Certiorari denied.

JUSTICE Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.


text:
    No. 82-6035.
    Quintana v. Virginia.
   Sup. Ct. Va. Certiorari denied.

Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall,

dissenting.

Adhering to our views that the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 227, 231 (1976), we would grant certiorari and vacate the death sentence in this case.


text:
    No. 82-5794.
    Anderson v. Spalding, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary, et al.,
   459 U. S. 1175. Petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 82-5862.
    Boggs v. United States,
   459 U. S. 1118. Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    March 9, 1983
    No. 82-6231.
    Baumann v. Keohane, Warden, et al.


text:
    March 11, 1983
    No. 82-1065.
    Conrock Co. et al. v. Texas Partners et al.


text:
    March 21, 1983
    No. 82-1192.
    DiPiero v. Goodman et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Mass, dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


author: Justice Stevens,

text:
    No. 81-1531.
    Montana v. Jackson.
   Sup. Ct. Mont. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Supreme Court of Montana to consider whether its judgment is based upon federal or state constitutional grounds, or both, California v. Krivda, 409 U. S. 33 (1972), and, if its judgment is not based upon state constitutional grounds, for further consideration in light of South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U. S. 553 (1983).

Justice Stevens,

dissenting.

In its opinion explaining its holding that the defendant’s refusal to submit to a sobriety test is inadmissible, the majority of the Supreme Court of Montana stated, in part:

“We hold that such refusal is testimonial in nature and that to admit evidence of the fact of refusal would violate the defendant’s Fifth Amendment privilege as guaranteed by the United States Constitution, and would further violate defendant’s privilege as guaranteed by Art. II, §25 of the Montana Constitution.” 195 Mont. 185, 185-186, 637 P. 2d 1.

After analyzing the federal constitutional question in the light of this Court’s opinion in Schmerber v. California, 384 U. S. 757 (1966), the court continued:

“The issue is also controlled by Art. II, § 25 of our own constitution, which provides that ‘No person shall be compelled to testify against himself in a criminal proceeding.’ The issue involves a communication that is testimonial in nature, and we must resolve the issue by applying Art. II, §25. Clearly, to permit evidence of defendant’s refusal to take the breathalyzer test would violate not only the United States Constitution, but also our own constitution.
“In State v. Finley (1977), 173 Mont. 162, 566 P. 2d 1119, we held that a defendant’s privilege against self-incrimination was not violated by admitting into evidence a videotape recording of his post-arrest words and actions. We decided that the tape had not been introduced for the incriminating content of the words uttered by the defendant, but rather for the purpose of aiding the jury in understanding the testimony of the witnesses who had observed the defendant’s unsteady walk and his slurred speech af ter his arrest. We specifically noted that the videotape did not contain incriminating responses to interrogation by the police. But the same situation does not exist here. It is obvious that defendant’s refusal is inherently self-incriminating because it carries a strong inference of guilt — the prosecutor would surely argue that defendant’s refusal to take the test was prompted only by his knowledge that the test results would reveal his intoxication, and therefore incriminate him.
‘We hold under our own constitution, that if a communication of refusal, whether written, verbal, or otherwise, involves the defendant’s consciousness of the facts and the operation of his mind in expressing it, the communication is testimonial in nature. A defendant’s silence or negative reply to an officer’s request which calls for an immediate reply is clearly an overt communication of the defendant’s thoughts in response to the request. Doyle v. Ohio (1976), 426 U. S. 610 .... It is the act of refusal that is pertinent and suggestive of guilt, rather than the way in which it is communicated. Under our constitution, the privilege against self-incrimination forbids any compulsory communication of an accused person’s thoughts, whether by acts or words spoken, and the fact that it does not extend its protection to forbid the compulsory exhibition of physical characteristics does not nullify the protection it does provide.” 195 Mont., at 191-192, 637 P. 2d, at 4-5.

Consistent with the views I expressed in dissent in South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U. S. 553, 566 (1983), I believe the statements I have quoted are sufficient to demonstrate that the judgment of the Montana Supreme Court rests on an adequate and independent state ground and that this Court is therefore without jurisdiction to vacate its judgment. I therefore respectfully dissent.


text:
    No. A-704.
    Barone et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir.

Application for recall and stay of mandate, addressed to Justice Marshall and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-728.
    Daily Local News Co. v. Gawthrop, Judge of the Court of Common Pleas in the Fifteenth Judicial District of Pennsylvania, et al.; and Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Gawthrop, Judge of the Court of Common Pleas in the Fifteenth Judicial District of Pennsylvania, et al.
    No. A-729.
   Sup. Ct. Pa.

The orders heretofore entered by Justice Brennan on March 3, 1983, are vacated and the applications for stay are denied.


text:
    No. A-771.
    Watt, Secretary of the Interior, et al. v. Community for Creative Non-Violence et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir.

The order heretofore entered by The Chief Justice on March 17, 1983, is continued pending the timely filing and disposition of a petition for writ of certiorari.


text:
    No. D-278.
    In re Disbarment of Paglianite.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 458 U. S. 1125.]


text:
    No. D-303.
    In re Disbarment of Otis.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 1082.]


text:
    No. D-315.
    In re Disbarment of Coburn.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 1141.]


text:
    No. D-320.
    In re Disbarment of Rubenstein.
   J. Mortimer Rubenstein, of Cliffside Park, N. J., having requested to resign as a member of the Bar of this Court, it is ordered that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys admitted to practice before the Bar of this Court. The rule to show cause, heretofore issued on February 28, 1983 [ante, p. 1009], is hereby discharged.


text:
    No. 81-984.
    First National City Bank v. Banco para el Comercio Exterior de Cuba.
   C. A. 2d Cir. [Certio-rari granted, 459 U. S. 942.] Motion of the Solicitor General to permit Richard G. Wilkins, Esquire, to present oral argument pro hac vice on behalf of the United States as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 81-1271.
    Falls City Industries, Inc. v. Vanco Beverage, Inc.
   C. A. 7th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 455 U. S. 988.] Motion of respondent for leave to file second supplemental brief after argument denied.


text:
    No. 81-2386.
    DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1034.] Motion of respondent Anchor Motor Freight, Inc., for special permission to divide oral argument denied.


text:
    No. 82-242.
    Burford, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency v. Sierra Club et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. [Certiorari granted sub nom. Gorsuch v. Sierra Club, 459 U. S. 942.] Motion of respondent Environmental Defense Fund for reconsideration of order of February 22, 1983 [459 U. S. 1197], denying leave to file motion for divided argument out of time denied.


text:
    No. 82-357 (A-759).
    Michigan v. Clifford et al.
   Ct. App. Mich. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1168.] Motion of Timothy A. Baughman, Esquire, to permit Janice M. Joyce Bartee to present oral argument pro hac vice on behalf of petitioner granted.

Application of petitioner for leave to file a brief in excess of the page limitations, presented to Justice O’Connor, and by her referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. 82-432.
    Local No. 82, Furniture & Piano Moving, Furniture Store Drivers, Helpers, Warehousemen & Packers, et al. v. Crowley et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1168.] Motion of respondents to limit questions presented for review and/or to dismiss the writ as improvidently granted denied.


text:
    No. 82-486.
    United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 610, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Scott et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1034.] Motion of National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-502.
    Pallas Shipping Agency, Ltd. v. Duris.
   C. A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1014.] Motion of Local 1291 et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-524.
    Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. et al. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.; United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission et al. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al.; and Commonwealth Edison Co. et al. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al.
    No. 82-545.
    No. 82-551.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1034.] Motion of Limerick Ecology Action, Inc., et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted.

Justice Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


text:
    No. 82-647.
    Kirkpatrick v. Christian Homes of Abilene, Inc., et al.
   Ct. App. Tex., 11th Sup. Jud. Dist. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1145.] Motion of petitioner to direct the Clerk to schedule oral argument during April 1983 granted.


text:
    No. 82-660.
    United States v. Cronic.
   C. A. 10th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1199.] Motion of respondent to discharge counsel appointed by lower court and for leave to proceed pro se denied. Motion for appointment of counsel granted, and it is ordered that David W. Duncan, Esquire, of Durango, Colo., be appointed to serve as counsel for respondent in this case.


text:
    No. 82-1041.
    Dickman et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. 11th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1199.] Motion of the parties to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.


text:
    No. 82-1066.
    United States v. Ptasynski et al.
   D. C. Wyo. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 459 U. S. 1199.] Motion of the Solicitor General to direct the Clerk to schedule oral argument during April 1983 granted.


text:
    No. 82-1135.
    Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections v. Wiggins.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1199.] Motion of respondent for appointment of counsel granted, and it is ordered that Craig Smyser, Esquire, of Houston, Tex., be appointed to serve as counsel for respondent in this case. In all other respects the motion is denied.


text:
    No. 82-1156.
    Teledyne Movible Offshore, Inc., et al. v. Thompson. Appeal from Sup. Ct. La.; and Solem, Warden, South Dakota State Penitentiary, et al. v. Bartlett.
    No. 82-1253.
   C. A. 8th Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file briefs in these cases expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 82-1260.
    Copperweld Corp. et al. v. Independence Tube Corp.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of petitioners to suggest that the Court invite the Solicitor General to present the views of the United States denied. Motions of American Iron & Steel Institute, National Association of Manufacturers, and Chamber of Commerce of the United States for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.,

Justice White took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions and this order.


text:
    No. 82-6077.
    In re Williams.
   Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until April 11, 1983, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 45(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33 of the Rules of this Court.


text:
    No. 82-6134.
    In re Morrow.
   Petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 82-6060.
    In re Green.
   Petition for writ of prohibition and/or mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 82-1050.
    Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Mathews et al.
   Appeal from D. C. N. D. Ala. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 82-708.
    Summa Corp. v. California ex rel. State Lands Commission et al.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certio-rari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1095.
    Pulley, Warden v. Harris.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-1326.
    Baroni et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-1881.
    Charles v. Wade et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-6404.
    Talley v. Crosson et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-630.
    Tischendorf, aka Montgomery v. Tischendorf.
   Sup. Ct. Minn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-803.
    Bialecki v. Little et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-811.
    No. 82-844.
    Elrod, Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois, et al. v. Massarella; and United States ex rel. Massarella v. Elrod, Sheriff of Cook County, et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-893.
    Stoller v. Marsh, Secretary of the Army.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-998.
    Stuart v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1017.
    McClure v. Undersea Industries, Inc., dba Scubapro, et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1026.
    Marine Midland Bank v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1029.
    Ivery v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1057.
    Brotherhood of Railway & Airline Clerks, Consolidated System Board of Adjustment 46, et al. v. Burlington Northern Inc. et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1078.
    Brown v. Kentucky.
   Sup. Ct. Ky. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1084.
    Association of Co-Operative Members, Inc., et al. v. Farmland Industries, Inc.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1129.
    No. 82-1134.
    New Orleans Steamship Assn. v. Williams et al.; and International Longshoremen’s Assn. et al. v. Williams et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1163.
    S.E.A. Towing Co., Inc. v. Great Atlantic Insurance Co.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1164.
    Dotson et al. v. Mountain Mission School, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1174.
    Interstate Marina Development Co. v. Wright et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1181.
    James v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1190.
    Stillwater Condominium Assn. v. American Home Assurance Co. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1193.
    Marashi v. Forbes Furniture Co. et al.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 5th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1202.
    Steere Tank Lines, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1204.
    Wer-Coy Fabrication Co., Inc. v. Sheet Metal Workers International Assn., Local Union No. 292, AFL-CIO.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1206.
    Reusser, Administrator of the Estate of Reusser v. American Bankers Insurance Co.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1211.
    Fry et al. v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1214.
    Lehner v. United States et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1224.
    KATV-Channel 7 v. Thomas.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1227.
    Forbes v. Newman.
   Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1235.
    Luna v. Texas.
   Ct. App. Tex., 5th Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1236.
    Morton et al. v. Zidell Explorations, Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1238.
    Meyerson et al. v. Espanola Way Corp.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1245.
    Mowder et al. v. Illinois ex rel. Roberts, State’s Attorney, Sangamon County, Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1249.
    Ojeda v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1250.
    Florida ex rel. Smith, Trustee v. Orange County, Florida, et al.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 5th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1251.
    Rome v. Supreme Court of Kansas.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1252.
    Becton v. Detroit Terminal of Consolidated Freightways.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1254.
    Lewis v. Central Piedmont Community College.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1265.
    Illinois v. Garcia.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1268.
    Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon v. Egger, Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1284.
    Knight et al. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1288.
    American Broadcasting Cos., Inc. v. Clark.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1294.
    Aztec Steel Co. et al. v. Florida Steel Corp.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1298.
    McManus v. Pennsylvania.
   Super. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1314.
    Fogarty v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1315.
    Bunch v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1316.
    DiLeo v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1323.
    No. 82-1336.
    Marrale v. United States; and Marrale v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1329.
    Fisherman v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1332.
    Aviles v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1333.
    Marin Ridgeland Co. et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1337.
    Pecora v. Maryland.
   Ct. Sp. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1340.
    Compania de Gas de Nuevo Laredo, S.A. v. Entex, Inc.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1343.
    Honigman v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1357.
    Bratton v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1358.
    Quenzer v. Quenzer.
   Sup. Ct. Wyo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1359.
    Ciotti v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1366.
    Adams v. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1368.
    Cooper v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1375.
    Ehlinger v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1392.
    Strain v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5821.
    Ames v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5876.
    Boyles v. Alaska.
   Sup. Ct. Alaska. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5882.
    Gomez-Gomez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5890.
    Payne v. Missouri.
   Sup. Ct. Mo. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5895.
    Morris v. Missouri.
   Sup. Ct. Mo. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5921.
    Ruiz et al. v. Estelle et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5939.
    Ballesteros v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6020.
    LaGrange v. Texas.
   Ct. App. Tex., 13th Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6055.
    Henderson v. Raines.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6062.
    Fornash v. Marshall.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6064.
    Pool v. Wyrick, Warden, Missouri State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6067.
    Hammer v. Meachum, Director of Oklahoma Department of Corrections, et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6071.
    Sulie v. Duckworth, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6074.
    Cegielski v. Wisconsin.
   Ct. App. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6076.
    Oxley v. Louisiana.
   Sup. Ct. La. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6078.
    Ronson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6084.
    Thrasher v. Missouri State Highway Commission et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6085.
    Roberts v. King, Secretary, Louisiana Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6086.
    Murray v. Maggio, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6092.
    Bachert v. Pennsylvania.
   Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6095.
    Evans v. Malm Fireplaces, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6097.
    Jackson v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6098.
    Anderson v. Mintzes.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6101.
    Sawyer v. Florida Bar.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6102.
    Adams v. Mathis et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6105.
    Donaldson v. Maggio, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6107.
    Trolia v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6112.
    Moore v. Smith, Superintendent, Kentucky State Reformatory.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6119.
    Carpenter v. Rees, Warden, Kentucky State Reformatory, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6124.
    Dykes v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6125.
    Huang v. Fitzpatrick et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6129.
    Lee et al. v. New York.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6130.
    Rizzo v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6131.
    Parker v. Louisiana.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6132.
    Wulffenstein v. Utah.
   Sup. Ct. Utah. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6133.
    Whitley v. Beachman et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6136.
    Vasquez v. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6138.
    Brooks v. President of the United States et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6147.
    Brown v. Minneapolis Electric Steel Castings Co. et al.
   Sup. Ct. Minn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6150.
    Fejeran, aka Cruz v. People of the Territory of Guam.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6151.
    Hayes v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6155.
    Spitler v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6161.
    Donovan v. Harris, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6170.
    Barrett v. South Carolina.
   Sup. Ct. S. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6173.
    Angulo-Quinones v. United States; Cuestas-Fuentes v. United States; and Cesar v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6177.
    Simmons v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6179.
    Reeves v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6183.
    Ostrer v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6185.
    Fail v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6196.
    Tabares et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6207.
    Estrada v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6212.
    Gibson v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6215.
    Wilson v. Rose, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6220.
    Collins v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6224.
    Antonelli v. Kunev et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6235.
    Rowe v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6243.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6251.
    Riddle v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6252.
    Sheeley v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6259.
    Golden v. Georgia.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6261.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6271.
    Keval v. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-925.
    Daly v. Sprague et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Blackmun took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 82-1221.
    Harris v. New York.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.

Justice Blackmun took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 82-930.
    New York v. Nelson.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed informa pawperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-944.
    Bagnell v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall would grant the petition for writ of certiorari and vacate the conviction.


text:
    No. 82-1223.
    Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. Blume et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

The Chief Justice and Justice Blackmun took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 82-1233.
    O’Bannon, Secretary of Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, et al. v. Coleman et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Motion of respondent Coleman for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5922.
    No. 82-6019.
    No. 82-6089.
    Smith v. Mississippi. Harris v. Pulley, Warden, California State Prison at San Quentin. Morris v. Tennessee.
   Sup. Ct. Miss.; C. A. 9th Cir.; and Sup. Ct. Tenn. Certiorari denied. Reported below: No. 82-5922, 419 So. 2d 563; No. 82-6019, 692 F. 2d 1189; No. 82-6089, 641 S. W. 2d 883.

Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall,

dissenting.

Adhering to our views that the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 227, 231 (1976), we would grant certiorari and vacate the death sentences in these cases.


text:
    No. 82-6145.
    Tatum v. Regents of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Petitioner is directed to file a response to the motion of respondents for damages within 30 days. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-764.
    No. 82-5528.
    No. 82-5793.
    White et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Buttrum v. Georgia, Horton v. Georgia,
   459 U. S. 1088; 459 U. S. 1156; and 459 U. S. 1188. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 82-5497.
    No. 82-5524.
    Chodos v. United States et al., Jones v. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections,
   459 U. S. 1111; and 459 U. S. 1174. Motions for leave to file petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    March 28, 1983
    No. 82-901.
    Knight et al. v. Minnesota Community College Faculty Assn. et al.
   Affirmed on appeal from D. C. Minn.


text:
    No. 82-1269.
    Fink v. Board of Education of Warren County Schools.
   Appeal from Pa. Commw. Ct. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. A-751 (82-6368).
    Rose v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Fla.

Application for stay, addressed to Justice Blackmun and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. D-309.
    In re Disbarment of McClellan.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 1140.]


text:
    No. D-316.
    In re Disbarment of Harris.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 459 U. S. 1167.]


text:
    No. D-330.
    In re Disbarment of Bluestein.
   It is ordered that William Jacob Bluestein, of Los Angeles, Cal., be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. 82-185.
    No. 82-246.
    No. 82-259.
    Boston Firefighters Union, Local 718 v. Boston Chapter, NAACP, et al.; Boston Police Patrolmen’s Assn., Inc. v. Castro et al.; and Beecher et al. v. Boston Chapter, NAACP, et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 967.] Motion of American Jewish Congress for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae denied.

Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


text:
    No. 82-486.
    United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 610, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Scott et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1034.] Motions of Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc., and Legal Foundation of America for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-695.
    Franchise Tax Board of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction postponed, 459 U. S. 1085.] Motion of American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-713.
    Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd.,
   ante, p. 533. Motion to substitute Blackburn Truck Lines, Inc., as party petitioner in place of Thur-ston Motor Lines, Inc., denied without prejudice to consideration of the motion by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on remand.


text:
    No. 82-940.
    Hishon v. King & Spalding.
   C. A. 11th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1169.] Motion of the parties to unseal the record granted.


text:
    No. 82-973.
    Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Stevic.
   C. A. 2d Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 1010.] Motion of the Solicitor General to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.


text:
    No. 82-6164.
    In re Johnson.
   Petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 82-898.
    Minnesota State Board for Community Colleges v. Knight et al.; and Minnesota Community College Faculty Assn. et al. v. Knight et al.
    No. 82-977.
   Appeals from D. C. Minn. Probable jurisdiction noted, cases consolidated, and a total of one hour allotted for oral argument.


text:
    No. 82-960.
    National Labor Relations Board v. City Disposal Systems, Inc.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1071.
    Aluminum Company of America et al. v. Central Lincoln Peoples’ Utility District et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-2402.
    Performance Products, Inc. v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-739.
    Juren et al. v. United States.
   Temp. Emerg. Ct. App. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-873.
    Rice et al. v. Southern California Edison Co. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-900.
    Middleton v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1008.
    County of Ventura v. Tillett.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1109.
    Kearney & Trecker Corp. v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1137.
    American Radio Assn. et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1171.
    Everett v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1244.
    No. 82-1309.
    Citytrust et al. v. Joy; and Baldwin et al. v. Joy.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1274.
    Timberland Machines & Engineering Corp. et al. v. Mainland Industries, Inc.
   Ct. App. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1277.
    Carsonite International Corp. et al. v. Carson Manufacturing Co., Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1297.
    Texstar Corp., Transferee of the Assets of Unitex Industries, Inc., et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1299.
    Brydle et ux. v. Kalasunas et ux.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1306.
    Columbia Gas of West Virginia, Inc. v. Public Service Commission of West Virginia.
   Sup. Ct. App. W. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1308.
    Wilmington Medical Center, Inc., et al. v. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1317.
    J. Kaufman Iron Works, Inc., et al. v. Shackelton et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1318.
    DeMasi et al. v. Rhode Island,
   Sup. Ct. R. I. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1322.
    United States et al. v. Willamette Industries, Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1328.
    Pfotzer et al. v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1351.
    M. R. Yudofsky & Associates et al. v. Kentucky Department of Finance.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1370.
    Karapinka v. United States et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1400.
    Yokum v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5791.
    Johnston v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5799.
    Lewis v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-5992.
    No. 82-6109.
    No. 82-6169.
    Kilbane et al. v. Marshall et al.; Steele v. Taylor, Superintendent, Columbus Correctional Facility; and Kilbane v. Marshall.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 684 F. 2d 1193 and 697 F. 2d 128.


text:
    No. 82-6040.
    Chira v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6059.
    Allen v. Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Grand Lodge et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6113.
    Pellot v. Pennsylvania.
   Super.-Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6121.
    Braswell et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6122.
    Cochran v. Illinois et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6127.
    Dorsey v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6137.
    Ma v. First National Corporation of Appleton et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6142.
    Le Brun v. Cupp, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6144.
    Udell v. University of Lowell et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6148.
    Johl et al. v. Moukawsher et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6152.
    Barto v. Pennsylvania.
   Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6157.
    Roberts v. Local One, Amalgamated Lithographers of America.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6158.
    Pruitt v. Rogers.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6159.
    Desroches v. Rhode Island.
   Sup. Ct. R. I. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6166.
    Marshall v. Pennsylvania.
   Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6167.
    United States ex rel. Speight v. Harris et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6174.
    Wexler v. Lees.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6175.
    Whitehawk v. Solem, Warden, South Dakota State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6178.
    Jackson v. Michigan.
   Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6195.
    Sullivan v. Fogg, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6197.
    Brayboy v. Scully, Warden, Green Haven Correctional Facility, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6219.
    Bontempo v. Fenton, Warden, Rahway State Penitentiary, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6221.
    Evans v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6245.
    Adams v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6276.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6278.
    Proctor v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6286.
    McKinney v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6290.
    Whiting v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6293.
    Badillo v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6294.
    Weaver v. Carriglitto et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6323.
    Boger v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1131.
    No. 82-6108.
    No. 82-6115.
    No. 82-6154.
    Wheat v. Mississippi. Nelson v. Zant, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center. Hill v. Georgia. Martin v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Miss.; Sup. Ct. Ga.; Sup. Ct. Ga.; and Sup. Ct. Fla. Cer-tiorari denied. Reported below: No. 82-1131, 420 So. 2d 229; No. 82-6108, 250 Ga. 152, 296 S. E. 2d 590; No. 82-6115, 250 Ga. 277, 295 S. E. 2d 518; No. 82-6154, 420 So. 2d 583.

Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall,

dissenting.

Adhering to our views that the death penalty is in all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U. S. 153, 227, 231 (1976), we would grant certiorari and vacate the death sentences in these cases.


text:
    No. 82-1283.
    Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections v. Carter.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-875.
    No. 82-5836.
    No. 82-5925.
    No. 82-5932.
    No. 82-6010.
    No. 82-6042.
    No. 82-6063.
    Irish People, Inc. v. Smith, Attorney General of the United States, Ballentine v. Harris, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility, McColpin v. United States, Watnick v. Elgin State Hospital, Lott v. Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Wade v. United States, Schlomann v. Ralston, Warden,
   459 U. S. 1172; 459 U. S. 1213; 459 U. S. 1216; 459 U. S. 1216; 459 U. S. 1220; 459 U. S. 1221; and 459 U. S. 1221. Petitions for rehearing denied.