text:
    No. 86-1034.
    Virginia v. American Booksellers Assn., Inc., et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 479 U. S. 1082.] Motion of appellees for leave to file a supplemental brief after argument granted.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    No. 86-1172.
    Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. Miller et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 483 U. S. 1004.] Motion of Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 86-1357.
    United States Department of Justice et al. v. Julian et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 482 U. S. 926.] Motion of the Solicitor General to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted. •


text:
    No. 86-1415.
    Marino et al. v. Ortiz et al.; and Costello et al. v. New York City Police Department et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. [Certiorari granted, 481 U. S. 1047 and 482 U. S. 912.] Motion of the Solicitor General to permit Glen D. Nager, Esq., to present oral argument pro hac vice granted.


text:
    No. 86-7009.
    In re Shibuya; In re Shibuya; and In re Shibuya,
    No. 86-7012.
    No. 87-5032.
   ante, p. 811. Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.


text:
    No. 87-170.
    Copley et al. v. Heil-Quaker Corp. et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of appellants to expedite consideration and/or to consolidate this case with No. 87-367, Bendix Autolite Corp. v. Midwesco Enterprises, Inc. [probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 923], denied.


text:
    No. 87-5489.
    Bennett v. North American Van Lines et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until December 7, 1987, 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.

Justice Brennan, Justice Marshall, Justice Blackmun, and Justice Stevens,

dissenting.

For the reasons expressed in Brown v. Herald Co., 464 U. S. 928 (1983), we would deny the petition for writ of certiorari without reaching the merits of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis.


text:
    No. 87-580.
    In re Polyak.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Petition for writ of common-law certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-505.
    Chick Kam Choo et al. v. Exxon Corp. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 86-2003.
    Brauner v. McConnell et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-2029.
    Dunlap v. University of Kentucky.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-7077.
    Dainwood v. Lynaugh, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-138.
    Nicolosi et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-224.
    Dow Chemical Co. et al. v. Ryan et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-297.
    Port Authority Police Benevolent Assn., Inc., et al. v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-351.
    Stearns Co. v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-374.
    Chotin Transportation, Inc. v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-403.
    Federal Pacific Electric Co., Inc. v. Dighton et al.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-468.
    Austin v. BVA Credit Corp., aka Bank of Virginia.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-472.
    Richardson et al. v. Lane et al.
   Int. Ct. App. Haw. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-484.
    Vatican Shrimp Co., Inc. v. Solis.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-486.
    Taylor et al. v. Hudson Pulp & Paper Corp. et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-488.
    National Marine Services, Inc., et al. v. Seafarers International Union of North America.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-489.
    Coherent, Inc. v. Spectra-Physics, Inc.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-490.
    Aronson v. Illinois et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-491.
    Williams et al. v. Baxter.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-497.
    Feldman et al. v. Pioneer Petroleum, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-507.
    Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Burk, Judge, Circuit Court of Florida, Palm Beach County, et al.; and Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Burk, Judge, Circuit Court of Florida, Palm Beach County, et al.
    No. 87-508.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-514.
    Hooper et al. v. Sachs et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-516.
    Roman v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-518.
    Hagar v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-530.
    Joseph O. Fawcett & Sons, Inc., et al. v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-533.
    Stever v. New Jersey.
   Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-539.
    Robertson v. City of Louisville, by and Through the Urban Renewal and Community Development Agency of Louisville.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-554.
    Oklahoma v. Todd.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-559.
    Ramsundar v. Connecticut.
   Sup. Ct. Conn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-565.
    Haston v. United States.
   Ct. Mil. App. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-577.
    Anderson et al. v. State Oil and Gas Board of Alabama et al.
   Ct. Civ. App. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-581.
    Pappanikolaou v. Administrator of Veterans Administration.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-582.
    Adman v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-596.
    Cheek v. Doe et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-611.
    Federation of Lorton Communities v. Barry et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-612.
    Dekle v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-627.
    Tomasello v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5054.
    Cook v. Ford, Warden.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5102.
    Lagerquist v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5143.
    Cox v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5149.
    Vlasak v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5160.
    Hincapie v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5163.
    Welch v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5321.
    Lee v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5351.
    Preisler v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5389.
    Shue v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5525.
    Ontiveros v. Schmidt et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5530.
    Lauderdale v. Superior Court of California, County of Alameda, et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5533.
    Davis v. Murray, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5535.
    Dingle v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5536.
    Hine v. Stutsman.
   Sup. Ct. Nev. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5541.
    Savage v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5543.
    McGovern v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5544.
    Woods v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5548.
    Levinson v. Litton Systems, Inc.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5549.
    Dickerson v. Louisiana et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5551.
    Baylis v. Butler, Warden.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5559.
    Zendejas v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5563.
    Ward v. Thieret, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5566.
    Brown v. Ryan, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Dallas, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5572.
    Huskey v. Kentucky et al.
   Cir. Ct. Warren County, Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5577.
    Martin v. Cohn, Superintendent, Indiana State Reformatory.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5579.
    Williams v. Cadillac Insurance Co. et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5582.
    LeBlanc v. Nevada.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5584.
    Ruffin v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5588.
    Ramirez-Rios v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5591.
    Hawkins v. Lynaugh, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5594.
    Lentz v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5597.
    Jennings v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5598.
    Cauchon v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5601.
    Brown v. Luther, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5602.
    Abdouch v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5604.
    Buford v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5616.
    Hill v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5618.
    Binder v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5636.
    Leight v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5644.
    Lunz v. Henderson, Superintendent, Auburn Correctional Facility, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5650.
    Levine v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5654.
    Stange v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5657.
    Rodrin v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5662.
    Livoy v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5664.
    Cohan v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5668.
    Flakes v. Wisconsin.
   Ct. App. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5671.
    Bertram v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5681.
    Nersesian v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-120.
    Foltz, Warden v. Hopson.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-162.
    New Mexico v. Hensel.
   Ct. App. N. M. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed informa pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-555.
    Ohio v. Rogers, aka Hudson.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-509.
    Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Hagler et al.; and Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc. v. Florida; and Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Hagler et al.; and Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Florida.
    No. 87-510.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 4th Dist. Motion of respondent John W. Hagler for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


author: Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall,

text:
    No. 87-5528.
    Smith v. Oklahoma. Jones v. Bair, Superintendent, Mecklenburg Correctional Center. Zuniga v. North Carolina.
    No. 87-5538.
    No. 87-5562.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla.;

Sup. Ct. Va.; and

Sup. Ct. N. C. 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 sentences in these cases.


text:
    No. 86-1899.
    Polyak v. Stack et al., Heller v. Consolidated Rail Corporation et al., Verderber v. Cantello Plumbing Corp., Ball v. White, Warden, Brumbaugh v. Brumbaugh, Byrd v. Missouri, Haddix v. City of Dayton, Reiter v. Crosier et al., Brown v. Dyke et al., Haywood v. Massey et al., Witherspoon v. W. R. Grace & Co., Latshaw v. MCA, Inc., Postel v. Texas Water Development Board et al., Quast v. Quast, Nakagawa v. Colorado, In re Callanan,
    No. 86-1933.
    No. 86-2071.
    No. 86-6705.
    No. 86-6907.
    No. 86-6941.
    No. 86-6982.
    No. 86-7016.
    No. 86-7020.
    No. 86-7047.
    No. 86-7058.
    No. 86-7119.
    No. 87-128.
    No. 87-177.
    No. 87-5273.
    No. 87-5435.
   ante, p. 801;

ante, p. 824;

ante, p. 831;

et al., ante, p. 832;

ante, p. 834;

ante, p. 872;

ante, p. 837;

ante, p. 839;

ante, p. 839;

ante, p. 840;

ante, p. 841;

ante, p. 843;

ante, p. 851;

ante, p. 853;

ante, p. 803; and

ante, p. 894. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    November 23, 1987
    No. 87-376.
    Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission v. National Basketball Assn. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari dismissed under this Court’s Rule 53.


text:
    November 30, 1987
    No. 87-340.
    Wyant v. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources et al.
   Appeal from Pa. Commw. Ct. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-588.
    Peabody Coal Co. v. State Tax Commission of Missouri et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Mo. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5634.
    Wool v. Richardson et al.
   Appeal from Ct. Sp. App. Md. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-579.
    Katz v. New York.
   Appeal from App. Term, Sup. Ct. N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 87-625.
    Schapiro v. Heritage Mutual Insurance Co.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Wis. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 87-637.
    Green v. Franklin.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 87-5596.
    Armstrong v. Armstrong.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 87-5587.
    Murphy v. Aetna Life & Casualty et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 9th Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


text:
    No. A-342 (87-731).
    Globe Newspaper Co. et al. v. King.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Motion of respondent to vacate the stay granted by Justice Brennan denied.


text:
    No. D-650.
    In re Disbarment of Slotkin.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 483 U. S. 1051.]


text:
    No. D-663.
    In re Disbarment of Ciardelli.
   It is ordered

that Victor F. Ciardelli, 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. 110, Orig.
    In re Republic of Suriname ex rel. Boerenveen.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 86-1034.
    Virginia v. American Booksellers Assn., Inc., et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 479 U. S. 1082.] Motion of appellant for leave to file a supplemental brief after argument granted.


text:
    No. 86-6139.
    Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 483 U. S. 1004.] Motion of Texas for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 87-333.
    Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
   C. A. 2d Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 87-5454.
    Wrenn v. Gould et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until December 21, 1987, 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.

Justice Brennan, Justice Marshall, and Justice Black-mun,

dissenting.

For the reasons expressed in Brown v. Herald Co., 464 U. S. 928 (1983), we would deny the petition for writ of certiorari without reaching the merits of the motion to proceed in forma pawperis.


text:
    No. 87-5772.
    Lewis et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of petitioners to expedite consideration of the petition for writ of certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5569.
    In re Abraham; and In re McCollum.
    No. 87-5586.
   Petitions for writs of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 87-714.
    In re Branson.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Petition for writ of mandamus or certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-2037.
    Landers v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 87-339.
    City of New York et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 87-363.
    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Martin Exploration Management Co. et al.; and Public Service Commission of the State of New York et al. v. Martin Exploration Management Co. et al.
    No. 87-364.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Motions of Williams Natural Gas Co. and Interstate Natural Gas Association for leave to file briefs as amici curiae in No. 87-363 granted. Certiorari granted, cases consolidated, and a total of one hour allotted for oral argument.


text:
    No. 86-7147.
    Maclin v. Mobile Consortium et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-135.
    Ensign et vir v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-222.
    Silver v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill, 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-250.
    Real, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Central District of California v. Yagman.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-268.
    Baker v. Department of the Navy.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-341.
    Campbell et ux. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-346.
    Fernandez v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-373.
    Transamerica Airlines, Inc. v. Air Line Pilots Assn., International.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-395.
    Roe v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-407.
    Ofshe v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-445.
    Allison v. Hamilton.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-448.
    Hester, Agent-in-Charge, Western District, Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission v. McGee, dba The Liquor Center.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-455.
    Nakashian v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-458.
    Nieves et al. v. Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corp.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-495.
    Adkins v. Seaboard System Railroad.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-512.
    Berry’an v. Hughes Aircraft Co. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-520.
    Hancich v. Gopoian et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-524.
    Rudolph v. Alabama.
   Ct. Crim. App. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-538.
    Simpson et al. v. Louisville and Jefferson County Metropolitan Sewer District.
   Sup. Ct. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-540.
    General Administration of Civil Aviation of the Peoples Republic of China v. Barkanic, Personal Representative of the Estate of Barkanic, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-541.
    Danbury, Inc. v. Olive, Director, Bureau of Internal Revenue, Government of the Virgin Islands.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-546.
    United Auto Workers, Local 422 v. Tosti.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-547.
    State Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services of Kansas v. Americare Properties, Inc., dba Russell Kare Center et al.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-550.
    Horwitz v. Board of Medical Examiners of Colorado et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-552.
    Lary v. Ansari et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-556.
    Leighton v. Uniroyal, Inc., et al.
   Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-558.
    Henn et al. v. National Geographic Society.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-561.
    Insurance Company of North America v. Globe Tankers et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-568.
    Loesch v. Heck.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-569.
    Davis v. Exxon Corp.
   Ct. App. Tex., 9th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-572.
    Florida et al. v. Coleman et al.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 5th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-574.
    DeCintio v. Westchester County Medical Center et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-575.
    Morse et al. v. The Daily Press, Inc.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-587.
    Scott, Director, Arkansas Department of Human Services, et al. v. Drake.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-594.
    Lovelace v. Acme Markets, Inc.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-623.
    Hensley v. Stanley et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-667.
    Smith v. United States Merit Systems Protection Board, Office of Personnel Management.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-688.
    Zemsky v. City of New York et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-749.
    Peacock v. United States.
   Ct. Mil. App. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5039.
    Moore v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5137.
    McCullum v. Michigan.
   Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5147.
    Mills v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5179.
    Calles v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5244.
    Pena v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5251.
    Lee v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5295.
    Jewell v. Kassulke, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5316.
    Davis v. Xerox Corp.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5365.
    Smith v. Oregon.
   Ct. App. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5402.
    Moreno Morales v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5413.
    Salvador v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5440.
    Kelly v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5526.
    Mahdavi v. Director, Veterans Administration.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5545.
    Baig v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5573.
    Bury v. City of Lakeland, Florida, et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5574.
    Bruce v. Luke V. Bellanger, Inc.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5576.
    Rios v. Veterans Administration.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5590.
    Brown v. Georgia.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5608.
    In re Kochel.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5610.
    Wesley v. Michigan.
   Sup. Ct. Mich. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5611.
    Del Rio v. Dugger, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5612.
    Trotz v. Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement Board et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5614.
    Davis v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5615.
    Harpool v. Kentucky.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5622.
    Bougher v. University of Pittsburgh et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5623.
    Easter v. Allsbrook et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5624.
    August v. City of Los Angeles et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5626.
    Becker v. Burger King Corp.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5629.
    Tristan v. Texas.
   Ct. App. Tex., 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5630.
    Thomas v. Newsome, Warden.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5631.
    Schuette, aka Agelini v. Giesen.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5632.
    Mingledolph v. McKean, Chairman of the Postal Board, et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5633.
    Motton v. Union Planters National Bank.
   Ct. App. Tenn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5637.
    Charest v. Maine.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Me. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5639.
    Strickland v. Kansas.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5640.
    McGlory v. Yoka et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5642.
    Johnson et al. v. Mississippi.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5643.
    Wilson v. Morgan et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5645.
    Rosenfeld v. Dunham, Superintendent, Arthur Kill Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5649.
    Zink v. Lynaugh, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5663.
    Kenyatta v. Muncy, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5682.
    Martinez v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5684.
    Vargas v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5685.
    Brown v. Evans et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5694.
    Wellman v. Rees, Superintendent, Kentucky State Reformatory.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5696.
    Johnston v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5704.
    Walton v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5705.
    Patten v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5710.
    Powell v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5711.
    Taylor v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5718.
    Miner v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5720.
    Meredith v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5727.
    Ayarza-Garcia et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5740.
    Cooper v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5741.
    Jones et al. v. North Carolina.
   Ct. App. N. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5749.
    Salas v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5756.
    Jones v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5759.
    Giraldo v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5763.
    Hazeltine v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5780.
    Gifford v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-571.
    City of Long Beach et al. v. Exxon Corp.
   et al. Temp. Emerg. Ct. App. Petition for writ of certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition denied.


text:
    No. 87-5105.
    Harper, a Minor, by her Mother and Next Friend, Harper v. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 87-5613.
    Williams v. Hevi-Duty Electric Co.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 87-5354.
    James v. Oklahoma. Childs v. Georgia. Brown v. North Carolina. Carter v. Texas. Halvorsen v. Kentucky. Snow v. Sumner, Director, Nevada Department of Prisons.
    No. 87-5482.
    No. 87-5567.
    No. 87-5568.
    No. 87-5607.
    No. 87-5688.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla.;

Sup. Ct. Ga.;

Sup. Ct. N. C.;

Ct. Crim. App. Tex.;

Sup. Ct. Ky.; and

Sup. Ct. Nev. . 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 sentences in these cases.


text:
    No. 87-5660.
    Cordeiro v. Conner et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ariz. Certiorari denied.

Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 86-1710.
    Knapp v. Arizona, Martinelli, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Martinelli, et al. v. United States Department of the Army, Halliwell v. Eu, Secretary of State of California, et al., Brumfield v. United States, Casa Linda Presbyterian Church in America et al. v. Grace Union Presbytery, Inc., Totus et al. v. Holly et al., Torres v. State Board of Law Examiners of Illinois, Casey et al. v. Tennessee, Holding v. Sovran Bank et al., Bayer v. Johnson, Secretary of Revenue of South Dakota, Johnson et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Yasui et al. v. United States, Neely v. United States, Comsia v. Mangnone et al., Jefferson v. Georgia, Lyons v. Scott et al., Thompson v. Alabama, May v. Texas, Smith v. United States, Wabeke v. Mutual Home Federal Savings & Loan Assn. et al., Spigelski v. Pittsburgh Human Relations Commission, Joubert v. Nebraska, Vahlsing v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co. et al., McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board of California et al., Fondo v. Sheindlin, Individually and as Judge of the Family Court of the State of New York, Bronx County, et al., Kriletich v. Commission on Judicial Performance et al., Brewster v. Mount Vernon Hospital et al., Martin v. St. Joe Container Co., Penk et al. v. Oregon State Board of Higher Education, Kerr v. Pennsylvania, King v. California et al., Sampang v. Marsh et al., Leighton v. Beatrice Cos., Inc., et al., Easley v. Koscinski et al., Van Sant v. Arlington County, Virginia, Williams v. Georgia, Horton v. Georgia, Felde v. Butler, Warden, Kost v. Capitol Corp. et al., Grant v. New York, Williams v. United States Postal Service et al., Howard v. Davis et al., Abraham v. White, Warden, Fletcher v. Hood et al., Van Sant v. Hudson et al., Silagy v. Illinois, Tilli v. Spaziani et al., De La Cerda v. Chemeketa Community College District et al., Haddix v. City of Dayton, Ohio, et al., Murray v. Plaut, Administrator, Maximum Security Facility, Lorton, Virginia, Andregg v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. et al., Owens v. Fulcomer, Felton v. Dixon et al.,

      No. 86-1888.
    No. 86-1891.
    No. 86-1905.
    No. 86-1911.
    No. 86-1912.
    No. 86-1988.
   ante, p. 816;

ante, p. 822;

ante, p. 801;

ante, p. 822;

et al., ante, p. 823;

ante, p. 823;

ante, p. 827;

No. 86-2005.

No. 86-2017.

No. 86-2049.

No. 86-2050.

No. 86-2066.

No. 86-6716.

No. 86-6922.

No. 86-6933.

No. 86-6951.

No. 86-6953.

No. 86-7082.

No. 86-7089.

No. 86-7093.

No. 86-7138.

No. 86-7162.

No. 87-2.

No. 87-9.

No. 87-46.

No. 87-53.

No. 87-91.

No. 87-190.

No. 87-195.

No. 87-207.

No. 87-229.

No. 87-288.

No. 87-304.

No. 87-5021.

No. 87-5023.

ante, p. 828;

ante, p. 828;

ante, p. 830;

ante, p. 830;

ante, p. 831;

ante, p. 832;

ante, p. 835;

ante, p. 872;

ante, p. 836;

ante, p. 872;

ante, p. 872;

ante, p. 842;

ante, p. 842;

ante, p. 844;

ante, p. 905;

ante, p. 845;

ante, p. 845;

ante, p. 847;

ante, p. 848;

ante, p. 849;

ante, p. 853;

ante, p. 853;

ante, p. 854;

ante, p. 802;

ante, p. 855;

ante, p. 898;

ante, p. 857;

ante, p. 857;

No. 87-5062.

No. 87-5082.

No. 87-5117.

No. 87-5151.

No. 87-5181.

No. 87-5189.

No. 87-5191.

No. 87-5212.

No. 87-5241.

No. 87-5242.

No. 87-5258.

No. 87-5300.

No. 87-5309.

No. 87-5318.

No. 87-5349.

No. 87-5378.

No. 87-5394.

No. 87-5396.

ante, p. 803;

ante, p. 905;

ante, p. 873;

ante, p. 863;

ante, p. 864;

ante, p. 864;

ante, p. 864;

ante, p. 915;

ante, p. 899;

ante, p. 866;

ante, p. 873;

ante, p. 900;

ante, p. 868;

ante, p. 901;

ante, p. 902;

ante, p. 909;

ante, p. 916; and

ante, p. 916. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 87-40.
    Allstate Insurance Co. v. Hawkins et ux.,
   ante, p. 874. Petition for rehearing denied.

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


text:
    No. 87-5409.
    Martin v. Pennsylvania State Real Estate Commission et al.,
   ante, p. 908. Petition for rehearing denied. Justice Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    December 7, 1987
    No. 87-5669.
    Alberton v. State Bar of California.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Cal. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-635.
    Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Graham et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U. S. 386 (1987).


text:
    No.---.
    Fisher v. Oklahoma.
   Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis without an affidavit of indigency executed by the petitioner granted.


text:
    No. D-652.
    In re Disbarment of Conway.
   Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 483 U. S. 1051.]


text:
    No. D-664.
    In re Disbarment of Wittmaack.
   It is ordered that John A. Wittmaack, of Hawley, 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-665.
    In re Disbarment of Enrico.
   It is ordered that Paul J. Enrico, of West Babylon, 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. 65, Orig.
    Texas v. New Mexico.
   Report of the Special Master received and ordered filed. Exceptions to the Report, with supporting briefs, may be filed by the parties within 45 days. Replies thereto, with supporting briefs, may be filed within 30 days. [For earlier decision herein, see, e. g., 482 U. S. 124.]


text:
    No. 94, Orig.
    South Carolina v. Baker, Secretary of the Treasury.
   Motion for compensation on behalf of the Estate of the Special Master, Samuel J. Roberts, granted. [For earlier order herein, see, e. g., ante, p. 920.]


text:
    No. 87-201.
    Mansell v. Mansell. Shell Oil Co. v. Director of Revenue of Missouri.
    No. 87-609.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 5th App. Dist.; and

Appeal from Sup. Ct. Mo. The Solicitor General is invited to file briefs in these cases expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 87-5411.
    In re Shibuya,
   ante, p. 922. Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of the order of this Court denying the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.


text:
    No. 87-5500.
    Tiller et al. v. NCNB Bank of North Carolina.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until December 28, 1987, 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.

Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall,

dissenting.

For the reasons expressed in Brown v. Herald Co., 464 U. S. 928 (1983), we would deny the petition for writ of certiorari without reaching the merits of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis.


text:
    No. 87-5648.
    Shibuya v. Voss et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until December 28, 1987, 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 the Court.

Justice Brennan, Justice Marshall, and Justice Stevens,

dissenting.

For the reasons expressed in Brown v. Herald Co., 464 U. S. 928 (1983), we would deny the petition for writ of certiorari without reaching the merits of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis.


text:
    No. 87-5659.
    Tischio v. New Jersey.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. N. J. Motion of appellant for leave to proceed informa pauperis denied. Appellant is allowed until December 28, 1987, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 45(a) and to submit a statement as to jurisdiction in compliance with Rule 33 of the Rules of this Court.

Justice Brennan, Justice Marshall, and Justice Stevens,

dissenting.

For the reasons expressed in Brown v. Herald, Co., 464 U. S. 928 (1983), we would dismiss the appeal for want of substantial federal question without reaching the merits of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis.


text:
    No. 87-5789 (A-383).
    In re Safir.
   Application for injunction, addressed to Justice White and referred to the Court, denied. Petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 87-354.
    Arizona v. Roberson.
   Ct. App. Ariz. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 87-416.
    United States Catholic Conference et al. v. Abortion Rights Mobilization, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of National Council of Churches of Christ in the U. S. A. et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 87-5367.
    Mills v. Maryland.
   Ct. App. Md. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 86-1562.
    Pawtuxet Cove Marina, Inc., et al. v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., Inc.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-7094.
    Leon-Martinez v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-7100.
    Banks v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-7109.
    DiGregorio v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-7143.
    Albertini v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-7160.
    Dancy v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-260.
    General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. v. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-273.
    St. John Stevedoring Co., Inc., et al. v. Wilfred; and Jones v. St. John Stevedoring Co., Inc., et al.
    No. 87-381.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-330.
    Martin-Musumeci v. Cramer et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-361.
    Slugocki et al. v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-400.
    Nunez v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-415.
    Northern Plains Resource Council et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-454.
    Dominican Republic et al. v. Meadows, Deceased, et al.; and Meadows, Deceased, et al. v. Dominican Republic et al.
    No. 87-634.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-478.
    Popovich et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-496.
    Overton v. United States.
   Ct. Mil. App. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-563.
    Kalvans v. Court of Appeals of Michigan.
   Sup. Ct. Mich. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-564.
    Liggett Group, Inc., et al. v. Cipollone, Individually and as Executor of the Estate of Cipollone, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-584.
    Webb v. Arkansas.
   Ct. App. Ark. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-586.
    Maalouf et al. v. Haddad et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-591.
    Pollard v. Rea Magnet Wire Co., Inc.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-595.
    Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., et al. v. Wederski.
   Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-604.
    McDermott, Inc., et al. v. Schexnider et ux.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-617.
    Looney v. Grundy National Bank et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-622.
    Valley Liquors, Inc. v. Renfield Importers, Ltd.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-629.
    American National Bank & Trust Co., as Trustee Under Trust Number 33832, et al. v. City of Chicago et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-631.
    Coastal Corp. et al. v. Apex Oil Co.; and Apex Oil Co. v. DiMauro et al.
    No. 87-633.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-638.
    Austin et al. v. Torrington Co.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-669.
    Daigle v. Pataschnick-Harrison Construction Co. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-736.
    Gelfand, Surrogate Judge, Bronx County v. New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-758.
    Hovater v. Equifax Services, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-759.
    Burns v. United States.
   Ct. Mil. App. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-768.
    Williams v. Ford, Warden.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5167.
    De Los Santos v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5196.
    Gonzalez v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5350.
    Bryant v. New Jersey.
   Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5453.
    Lawson v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5472.
    Puleo v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5510.
    Turner v. City of Lebanon et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5651.
    Lawrence v. Stokes et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5653.
    Baker v. Chagrin Valley Medical Corp. et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5656.
    Battle v. Jones et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5658.
    Marquez et al. v. Territory of Guam.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5665.
    Frederick v. Dugger, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5670.
    Crespo v. Armontrout, Warden.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5678.
    Scott v. Indiana.
   Sup. Ct. Ind. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5679.
    Wojtalewicz v. Shortridge et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5683.
    Edwards v. Iowa.
   Sup. Ct. Iowa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5687.
    Cleveland v. Kunkle et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5689.
    Ronzzo v. Cottringer et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5693.
    Solomon v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5695.
    Jones v. Rogers, Warden.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5716.
    Mulazim v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5721.
    Bynum v. Bureau of Prisons.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5723.
    Veal v. Abbott, Warden.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5750.
    Colangelo v. Donahue, Superintendent, Altona Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5778.
    Rawlings v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5808.
    Robles v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5810.
    Richardson v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5820.
    Guzy v. Wisconsin.
   Sup. Ct. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-1659.
    Continental Can Co. v. Gavalik et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 87-557.
    Fresno Police Officers Assn. et al. v. California et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.

Justice White would grant certiorari.


author: Justice White,

text:
    No. 86-7164.
    McDowell v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White,

with whom Justice Brennan joins,

dissenting.

In Faretta v. California, 422 U. S. 806 (1975), we held that an accused has a right to conduct his own defense. We also stated that, because an accused’s election to do so “relinquishes, as a purely factual matter, many of the traditional benefits associated with the right to counsel,” a defendant who chooses to proceed pro se may be allowed to do so only if he “ ‘knowingly and intelligently’ [chooses to] forgo those relinquished benefits.” Id., at 835. We stated that an accused wishing to be tried without counsel “should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establish that ‘he knows what he is doing and his choice is made with eyes open.’” Ibid.

Since Faretta, lower federal and state courts have sought to arrive at the proper balance between allowing an accused to exercise his right of self-representation, and at the same time, insuring that a waiver of a defendant’s right to counsel is only made when “knowing and intelligent” and “with eyes open.” In this case, for example, after petitioner indicated to the District Court his desire to present his own defense, the trial judge conducted a short colloquy with petitioner before allowing him to proceed pro se. On appeal, the Court of Appeals rejected petitioner’s claim that this brief exchange with the trial judge was insufficient to establish that he had “knowingly and intelligently” waived his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The Sixth Circuit concluded that “a fair reading of the record as a whole” established that petitioner elected to represent himself with “eyes open”; therefore it affirmed petitioner’s conviction. 814 F. 2d 245, 249 (1987). The Court of Appeals, however, in the exercise of its supervisory powers, required district judges in the future to conduct a more detailed inquiry of a defendant — based on the model offered at 1 Bench Book for United States District Judges §§1.02-2 — 1.02-5 (3d ed. 1986) — before allowing an accused to waive his right to counsel, as this petitioner had. 814 F. 2d, at 250-251.

In reaching this decision, the Sixth Circuit followed the approach taken by the District of Columbia Circuit in United States v. Bailey, 219 U. S. App. D. C. 67, 75-76, 675 F. 2d 1292, 1300-1301, cert. denied, 459 U. S. 853 (1982). It also rejected the position of the Third Circuit, which had reversed a conviction on facts similar to these, by interpreting Faretta to require a “searching inquiry” with an accused before allowing him to conduct his own defense. United States v. Welty, 674 F. 2d 185, 188-189 (1982); accord, Piankhy v. Cuyler, 703 F. 2d 728, 730-731 (CA3 1983). Two other Courts of Appeals have likewise read our decision in Faretta as requiring that a trial judge conduct a special “hearing to ensure that the accused understands the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding pro se.” United States v. Edwards, 716 F. 2d 822, 824 (CA11 1983); accord, United States v. Chaney, 662 F. 2d 1148, 1152 (CA5 1981).

By contrast, four Courts of Appeals have taken the position that no specific inquiries or special hearings must be conducted before an accused’s exercise of his Faretta rights will be considered “knowing and intelligent.” United States v. Hafen, 726 F. 2d 21, 26 (CA1), cert. denied, 466 U. S. 962 (1984); United States v. Kimmel, 672 F. 2d 720, 721-722 (CA9 1982); United States v. Trapnell, 638 F. 2d 1016, 1029 (CA7 1980); United States v. Tompkins, 623 F. 2d 824, 828-829 (CA2 1980). This conflict among the Courts of Appeals has now gained the attention of, and been a source of confusion to, the state courts as well. See, e. g., State v. Christensen, 40 Wash. App. 290, 292-297, 698 P. 2d 1069, 1071-1073 (1985) (discussing the varying applications of Faretta).

Because a conflict among the lower courts has emerged concerning the proper application and interpretation of our decision in Faretta, I would grant certiorari and address the question presented by this petition.


text:
    No. 87-615.
    Detsel, an Infant, by her Mother and Next Friend, Detsel v. Board of Education of the Auburn Enlarged City School District et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of Advocacy Inc. et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-618.
    Medical Inc. v. Regents of the University of Minnesota.
   Ct. App. Minn. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 87-648.
    Pennsylvania v. Cephas.
   Super. Ct. Pa. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5628.
    Willoughby v. Kentucky. Owens v. South Carolina.
    No. 87-5692.
   Sup. Ct. Ky.; and

Sup. Ct. S. C. 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 sentences in these cases.


text:
    No. 86-6923.
    Brown v. Dodd, Sheriff, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. McCoy, Executor of the Estate of McCoy, Gracey v. United States, Espenshade v. Pennsylvania State University et al., Wall v. Pennsylvania,
    No. 87-75.
    No. 87-406.
    No. 87-5141.
    No. 87-5387.
   ante, p. 874;

ante, p. 3;

ante, p. 914;

ante, p. 862; and

ante, p. 916. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 87-5426.
    Schastok v. Time Inc.,
   ante, p. 902. Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    December 14, 1987
    No. 87-639.
    Perati v. Buell et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist., dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5698.
    Eckert v. United States.
   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 certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-658.
    Ross et ux. v. City of Rolling Hills Estates et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist., dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.


text:
    No. 87-583.
    United Paperworkers International Union, AFL-CIO, Local No. 1069 v. S. D. Warren Co., a Division of Scott Paper Co.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Paperworkers v. Misco, Inc., ante, p. 29.


text:
    No. 85-1765.
    Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Crenshaw.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 480 U. S. 915.] Conditional motion of appellee for leave to file a supplemental brief after argument granted.

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


text:
    No. 86-1052.
    Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, Administrator of the Estates of Schlunk et al.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 895.] Motion of petitioner to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.


text:
    No. 86-1406.
    Puerto Rico Department of Consumer Affairs et al. v. Isla Petroleum Corp. et al.
   Temp. Emerg. Ct. App. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.

Justice O’Con-nor took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


text:
    No. 86-1743.
    Monessen Southwestern Railway Co. v. Morgan.
   Sup. Ct. Pa. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 813.] Motion of Association of American Railroads for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 87-65.
    United States v. Providence Journal Co. et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 87-323.
    Sokolov v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of petitioner to defer consideration of the petition for writ of certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 87-329.
    The Florida Star v. B. J. F.
   Appeal from Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 1st Dist. Because this appeal involves a question of law of the State of Florida which is determinative of this cause and for which there is no controlling precedent of the Supreme Court of Florida, this Court, pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(6) of the Florida Constitution, certifies to the Supreme Court of Florida and respectfully requests that court to answer, the following question: “Whether the Florida Supreme Court had jurisdiction, pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution or otherwise, to hear appellant’s appeal in this cause from the Florida First District Court of Appeal?” It is further ordered that the Clerk of this Court shall transmit to the Supreme Court of Florida certified copies of this order and the briefs filed in this Court in this matter. And it is further ordered that this Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter and that the proceedings in this Court shall be held in abeyance until further order of this Court.


text:
    No. 87-636.
    Karahalios v. National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1263. Alberta Gas Chemicals Ltd. et al. v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. et al.
    No. 87-652.
   C. A. 9th Cir.; and

C. A. 3d Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file briefs in these cases expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 87-5565.
    Clark v. Jeter.
   Super. Ct. Pa. Motion of Women’s Legal Defense Fund for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 87-654.
    New Energy Company of Indiana v. Limbach, Tax Commissioner of Ohio, et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ohio. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 87-59.
    United States Postal Service v. National Association of Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari granted limited to Question 2 presented by the petition.


text:
    No. 87-499.
    Christianson et al. v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition. In addition to this question, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: “Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have jurisdiction of the appeal from the District Court judgment entered on July 19, 1985?”


text:
    No. 86-431.
    Bevles Co., Inc. v. Teamsters Local 986.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-1380.
    Arkansas Public Service Commission et al. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission et al.; Arkansas Power & Light Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission et al.; and Reynolds Metals Co. et al. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission et al.
    No. 86-1424.
    No. 87-469.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 86-7032.
    Washington v. Department of the Army.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-131.
    Sierra Club v. Shell Oil Co. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-312.
    Duncan v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-425.
    Longiotti et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-632.
    Callahan et vir v. South Central Bell Telephone Co.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-641.
    Sobczyk v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. et al.
   Ct. App. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-657.
    Fowler v. Board of Education of Lincoln County, Kentucky, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-659.
    Hammond v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-663.
    Greenwald v. Florida.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-664.
    Ramming v. New Mexico.
   Ct. App. N. M. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-665.
    Lynaugh, Director, Texas Department of Corrections v. Young.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-666.
    Wheeler v. Main Hurdman.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-672.
    Foxgord, Individually and as Trustee of the Foxgord Trust, et ux. v. Hischemoeller.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-673.
    St. Hilaire v. International Paper Realty Corp. (two cases).
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Me. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-674.
    Mihalek Corp. et al. v. Michigan et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-678.
    Stallcop v. Kaiser Permanente et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-684.
    Gill v. Alabama.
   Ct. Crim. App. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-685.
    City of Pagedale, Missouri v. Harris et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-691.
    Galardi v. Lerner.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-708.
    Holifield v. Alabama.
   Ct. Crim. App. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-757.
    In re Sturman.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-760.
    Kong et ux. v. Hawaiian Marine Lines, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-770.
    Suarez v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-774.
    Aguiar, aka Woods v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-808.
    Fletcher et al. v. Estate of Christ.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5230.
    Nelson v. United States; Killip v. United States; and Krout v. United States.
    No. 87-5621.
    No. 87-5635.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5233.
    Jackson v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5369.
    Tinsley v. Murray, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections.
   Sup. Ct. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5388.
    Pennon v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5431.
    Wicker v. South Carolina.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5524.
    Orellana v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5534.
    Harper v. Alabama State Department of Human Resources et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5537.
    Grosshans v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5680.
    Winfield v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5691.
    Ware v. Kerby, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5700.
    Bailey v. Prince George’s County, Maryland, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5701.
    Bailey v. State’s Attorney for Prince George’s County.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5702.
    Washington v. Makowski.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5706.
    Mondragon v. New Mexico.
   Ct. App. N. M. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5707.
    Rogers v. Koehler, Warden.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5708.
    Benoit v. City Police Department of Crowley, Louisiana, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5709.
    Jones v. City of St. Louis et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5714.
    Toth v. American Greetings Corp.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5719.
    Payne v. LeFevre, Superintendent, Clinton Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5725.
    Higgins v. Wyoming Workers’ Compensation Division et al.
   Sup. Ct. Wyo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5728.
    Lepiscopo v. Wihl.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5730.
    Davis v. Jabe.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5733.
    Noll v. Blevins, Warden.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5738.
    Woolum v. Parke, Warden.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5747.
    Telepo v. New Jersey et al.
   Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5758.
    Billet v. American Family Publishers et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5800.
    Berton v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5802.
    Hester v. Kentucky.
   Sup. Ct. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5812.
    Roan v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5822.
    Latorre v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5832.
    Page v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5845.
    Finocchiaro v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5870.
    Simmons v. Tudor Engineering Co.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-246.
    L. E. Myers Co., High Voltage Division, et al. v. Secretary of Labor.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White,

with whom Justice O’Connor joins,

dissenting.

The issue in this case is upon which party in an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) enforcement action does the burden of proving that a workplace accident was the result of unforeseeable employee misconduct fall. The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the issue of unforeseeable employee misconduct is an affirmative defense: once the Government establishes a prima facie case of an employer’s failure to implement an effective safety program, then the employer has the burden of proving that the violation was caused by unforeseeable employee misconduct rather than inadequacies in the enforcement of its safety program. Brock v. L. E. Myers Co., High Voltage Div., 818 F. 2d 1270 (1987). In so holding, the court agreed with the position of the Eighth Circuit, Danco Construction Co. v. OSHRC, 586 F. 2d 1243 (1978), but reinforced the already confusing patchwork of conflicting approaches to this issue. In contrast to this position, some Circuits have held that the employer bears the burden of proving that it has implemented workplace safety rules that are effectively enforced, without imposing an initial evidentiary burden on the Government with respect to this defense. H. B. Zachry Co. v. OSHRC, 638 F. 2d 812 (CA5 1981); General Dynamics Corp., Quincy Shipbuilding Div. v. OSHRC, 599 F. 2d 453 (CA1 1979). Other Courts of Appeals place upon the Government the burden of proving that the accident was not the result of unforeseeable employee misconduct. Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. v. OSHRC, 737 F. 2d 350 (CA3 1984); Capital Electric Line Builders of Kansas, Inc. v. Marshall, 678 F. 2d 128 (CA10 1982); Ocean Electric Corp. v. Secretary of Labor, 594 F. 2d 396 (CA4 1979); Brennan v. OSHRC, 511 F. 2d 1139 (CA9 1975). This conflict among the Circuits shows no signs of abating and the issue is central to OSHA’s enforcement efforts; accordingly, I would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 87-607.
    Webb, Secretary of the Navy v. Maldonado.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White,

dissenting.

In Blum v. Stenson, 465 U. S. 886 (1984), the Court defined what constitutes a “reasonable attorney’s fee” under 42 U. S. C. § 1988 for salaried attorneys employed by legal aid organizations. We held that the fee awards of such attorneys must be calculated on the basis of the prevailing community rate for similar services by attorneys of comparable skill, experience, and reputation. Id., at 895-896, and n. 11. We did not decide whether the fee awards of private attorneys with an established billing rate must be calculated in the same manner.

Here, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an attorney’s fee award under 42 U. S. C. §2000e-5(k) based on an hourly rate that was consistent with the prevailing market rate but that substantially exceeded counsel’s own customary billing rate. Maldonado v. Lehman, 811 F. 2d 1341 (1987). The court expressly rejected the approach adopted by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 241 U. S. App. D. C. 11, 746 F. 2d 4 (1984), cert. denied, 472 U. S. 1021 (1985), which held that an attorney’s customary billing rate must be used in calculating a fee award so long as that rate is not unusually high or low.

It is true that the District of Columbia Circuit recently granted rehearing en banc in Save Our Cumberland Mountains, Inc. v. Hodel, 263 U. S. App. D. C. 409, 826 F. 2d 43 (1987), for the purpose of deciding whether Laffey ought to be reconsidered. The Cumberland Mountains case has been held in abeyance, however, pending the resolution of the petition for certiorari in this case. Hence, the conflict persists between the Ninth Circuit’s decision in this case and the District of Columbia Circuit’s decision in Laffey. It cannot be said with any certainty that the latter court will decide to overrule Laffey in whole or in part.

In addition, there is some tension between the Ninth Circuit’s definition of a “reasonable” fee and other courts’ definition of the term as “a fee large enough to induce competent counsel to handle the plaintiff’s case, but no larger.” Lenard v. Argento, 808 F. 2d 1242, 1247 (CA7 1987). See also Coulter v. Tennessee, 805 F. 2d 146, 148-149 (CA6 1986) (“Congress did not intend that lawyers . . . receive excess compensation or incentives beyond the amount necessary to cause competent legal work to be performed”), cert. denied, 482 U. S. 914 (1987). It is at least arguable that an attorney will have sufficient incentive to accept a case so long as he receives the same fee from suing the government as he would receive from suing a private party.

Finally, the question of what constitutes a “reasonable” fee for an attorney with an established billing rate is likely to arise in other circuits. The Court has previously observed that more than 100 federal statutes provide for an award of attorney’s fees to the prevailing party, and that “the benchmark for the awards under nearly all of these statutes is that the attorney’s fee must be ‘reasonable.’” Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council for Clean Air, 478 U. S. 546, 562 (1986). Hence, since fee awards under all statutes that provide for “reasonable” attorney’s fees are calculated in a similar manner, the petition raises an issue of considerable practical importance.

Because a conflict has arisen between two Courts of Appeals concerning the calculation of a “reasonable” fee for attorneys with established billing rates, I would grant certiorari and address the question presented by this petition.


text:
    No. 87-697.
    Rothenberg v. Amalgamated Sugar Co. et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 87-791.
    Elortegui et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 86-7015.
    Perry v. Louisiana; In re Yee; Luttrell et al. v. Martinez, Governor of Florida; Horton v. Trammell et al.; Bussey v. Levy, Ferguson & Grady et al.,
    No. 87-405.
    No. 87-5441.
    No. 87-5506.
    No. 87-5619.
   ante, p. 872;

ante, p. 923;

et al., ante, p. 930;

ante, p. 946; and

ante, p. 933. Petitions for rehearing denied.


author: Justice Brennan,

text:
    January 7, 1988
    No. A-527.
    Streetman v. Lynaugh, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   Application for stay of execution of sentence of death, presented to Justice White, and by him referred to the Court, denied.

Justice Blackmun and Justice Stevens would grant the application.

Justice Brennan,

with whom Justice Marshall joins,

dissenting.

Adhering to my view 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 (1976), I would grant the application for a stay and vacate the death sentence in this case. Even if I did not hold this view, for the reasons stated below I still would be compelled to vote to overturn this sentence.

I

Streetman was convicted in Texas of murder and sentenced by a jury to die. Pursuant to Texas law, Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann., Art. 37.071(b) (Vernon 1981 and Supp. 1988), the jury was told that if they answered “yes” to two special questions, Streetman would automatically be sentenced to death.

The first question asked “whether the evidence established beyond a reasonable doubt that the murder of the deceased was committed deliberately and with the reasonable expectation that the death of the deceased or another would result.” As Justice Blackmun has observed, an affirmative answer to this question is generally a foregone conclusion because intent is usually an element of the underlying crime of capital murder. Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U. S. 880, 916-917, and n. 1 (1983) (dissenting opinion). Thus, Streetman’s life hinged on the second question: “whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society.”

The jury returned with their answers: “Yes” to both questions. The sentence was accordingly fixed at death, and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the judgment. 698 S. W. 2d 132 (1985). Streetman’s first state and federal habeas corpus petitions (raising issues unrelated to the issue discussed below) were denied. 634 F. Supp. 290 (ED Tex. 1986); 812 F. 2d 950 (CA5 1987); 818 F. 2d 865 (CA5 1987). He then filed a second state habeas corpus petition in the state court calling into question, inter alia, the constitutionality of the Texas death penalty scheme’s treatment of mitigating evidence. The petition was denied in state court, and the subsequent second federal habeas corpus petition was denied by the District Court and the Court of Appeals. 674 F. Supp. 229; 835 F. 2d 1519; 835 F. 2d 1521 (1988). This application for a stay followed.

II

In 1976, this Court approved generally the Texas death penalty scheme. Jurek v. Texas, 428 U. S. 262 (1976). In the course of its analysis, the Court considered the treatment of mitigating evidence during the sentencing phase. The joint opinion announcing the judgment found that the Texas courts had construed the second special question “so as to allow a defendant to bring to the jury’s attention whatever mitigating circumstances he may be able to show.” Id., at 272 (opinion of Stewart, Powell, and Stevens, JJ.).

In Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U. S. 586, 604 (1978), the plurality held that “the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments require that the sentencer . . . not be precluded from considering, as a mitigating factor, any aspect of a defendant’s character or record and any of the circumstances of the offense that the defendant proffers as a basis for a sentence less than death.” Ibid, (opinion of Burger, C. J.). The Court has applied and explained Lockett in the nine years since it was announced. In Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U. S. 104 (1982), the Court applied Lockett to strike a state statute that precluded the sentencer from considering certain relevant mitigating evidence, in support of mitigating factors. Later, in Skipper v. South Carolina, 476 U. S. 1 (1986), the Court expressly stated that the sentencer must be given all mitigating evidence, defined as any evidence that “might serve ‘as a basis for a sentence less than death.’” Id., at 5 (quoting Lockett, supra, at 604).

This line of cases culminated last term in Hitchcock v. Dugger, 481 U. S. 393 (1987). That unanimous opinion began “[w]e have held that in capital cases, “‘the sentencer”’ may not refuse to consider or ‘ “be precluded from considering” ’ any relevant mitigating evidence.” Id., at 394 (quoting Skipper, supra, at 4, in turn quoting Eddings, supra, at 110). In considering the validity of a Florida death sentence, the Court concluded that “it could not be clearer that the advisory jury was instructed not to consider, and the sentencing judge refused to consider, evidence of non-statutory mitigating circumstances, and that the proceedings therefore did not comport with the requirements of Skipper . . . , Eddings . . . , and Lockett. . . .” 481 U. S., at 399.

From these cases it is clear that all relevant mitigating evidence must be available for consideration by the sentencer. The reasons underlying this firmly established rule lie in the unique nature of the death penalty. “[D]eath is a ‘punishment different from all other sanctions,’. . . and . . . therefore the considerations that inform the sentencing decision may be different from those that might be relevant to other liability or punishment determinations.” Booth v. Maryland, 482 U. S. 496, 509, n. 12 (1987) (quoting Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U. S. 280, 303-304, 305 (1976) (plurality opinion of Stewart, Powell, and Stevens, JJ.)). To this end, mitigating evidence that might be excludable in noncapital-sentencing procedures may be crucial in a capital case.

In Sumner v. Shuman, 483 U. S. 66 (1987), this Court held categorically that mandatory death sentences are unconstitutional, a determination foreshadowed by Woodson, supra. These cases recognize that a sentencer cannot make a judgment based on the facts of the particular case without all relevant mitigating evidence, Sumner, supra, at 75-76, and n. 5. Although disallowing such evidence would produce uniformity of sentences, the Court has “recognize [d] that a consistency produced by ignoring individual differences is a false consistency.” Eddings, supra, at 112. This “false consistency” is a natural consequence of the unadorned jury instructions given under Texas law.

In the instant case, the record discloses that Streetman has had a history of mental illness, stemming from an injury incurred while he was in the fifth grade, a circumstance that in every other jurisdiction would be considered mitigating. Yet the jury that sentenced him to die could draw but one inference from this evidence: Streetman posed a substantial threat of future dangerousness. Streetman complains that in Texas, evidence that could evoke feelings of sympathy or convince a jury that the defendant is not culpable enough to deserve death is perversely transformed into a factor militating solely in favor of death, in violation of Lockett, supra, and its progeny. Indeed, without an instruction informing the jury that the second special question is far broader than its words imply, he was faced with a true dilemma: introduce the evidence and run the risk that the jury will use it to answer affirmatively the second special question, or exclude the evidence entirely. We have already granted certiorari to consider this very question: “whether the jury must be instructed on the effect of mitigating evidence under the Texas capital punishment scheme.” Franklin v. Lynaugh, ante, p. 891. Nonetheless, the Court today refuses to stay Streetman’s execution.

Ill

Streetman, in his application for stay raises precisely the question we agreed to consider in Franklin. Despite the fact that there were sufficient votes on this Court to hold Streetman’s case for Franklin, there were not enough votes to grant Streetman’s application for a stay. Had Streetman been convicted of bank robbery, this would be of no moment. The Court would simply hold Streetman’s case until Franklin was decided, and then take appropriate action. But death is different. Due to the unique nature of the penalty, the relief that we could give any other type of habeas corpus petitioner is unavailable to Streetman. His case will be moot long before we can resolve Franklin — he will be dead. Therefore, we are presented with the same ironic situation as occurred in Watson v. Butler, 483 U. S. 1037 (1987), in which the normal and time-tested procedures of this Court are overcome by the different nature of the death penalty. Death is certainly different, but I had never believed it to be different in this way.

IV

The courts below have held that Streetman’s habeas corpus petition does not actually raise the question presented in Franklin because he failed to preserve the issue at his trial, I suppose by failing to request a particular jury instruction. However, it is clear that under Texas law the trial court was discouraged from giving a mitigating evidence instruction. Stewart v. State, 686 S. W. 2d 118 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). In fact, the court in Stewart, over a vigorous dissent, specifically held that “no jury charge regarding evidence of any mitigating circumstances [is] necessary since the questions prescribed under Article 37.071 clearly allow the jury to grasp the logical relevance of mitigating evidence.” Id., at 121 (citing Quinones v. State, 592 S. W. 2d 933, 947 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980)). That holding has been reiterated in numerous cases. Clark v. State, 717 S. W. 2d 910 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986); Fierro v. State, 706 S. W. 2d 310 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986); Johnson v. State, 691 S. W. 2d 619 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985); Lackey v. State, 638 S. W. 2d 439 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982); Adams v. State, 577 S. W. 2d 717 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979). Additionally, Texas has adopted pattern jury instructions. The instructions for death cases say nothing regarding how the jury is to consider mitigating evidence that actually supports a finding of future dangerousness. P. McClung, Jury Charges for Texas Criminal Practice 75-78 (rev. ed. 1981). If, as a matter of course and relying on Stewart and Quinones as well as the pattern jury instructions, Texas trial judges refuse to give such instructions when asked, Streetman surely was under no duty to make the futile request. Of course, whether or not this is the case in Texas is a question of fact. A habeas court has a duty to determine whether a hearing is necessary to resolve this question. See Habeas Corpus Rule 8. I believe that Streetman is entitled to an opportunity to make the required showing before he is executed.

Nor do I believe that Streetman could reasonably be held barred under an abuse-of-the-writ theory, as the District Court apparently found. The Franklin claim was not foreseeable prior to this Court’s issuance of the stay order. In light of this Court’s decision in Jurek, supra, upholding the Texas scheme, and the citation to Jurek in Lockett, supra, coupled with the Fifth Circuit’s explicit rejection of the claim, it was not abusive for Streetman to fail to raise the issue in his first federal petition.

Finally, as to the failure to raise the question on direct appeal, there is certainly no bar. Precedent in the Fifth Circuit and statements from this Court provided cause for the failure. See Reed v. Ross, 468 U. S. 1, 12-16 (1984).

For these reasons, I cannot conclude that Streetman’s Franklin claim was procedurally barred. Consequently, I must dissent from the refusal of this Court to stay Streetman’s death until we definitively resolve the questions his petition presents.

V

Streetman also raises a broader challenge to the Texas death penalty scheme. He alleges that given the nature of the special death penalty questions, no instruction, however phrased, could adequately inform the jury of its constitutional duty to consider properly all mitigating evidence. As a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has cogently demonstrated, it is time for this Court to reconsider the Texas system in light of the intervening precedent. Penry v. Lynaugh, 832 F. 2d 915 (1987). The persuasive opinions of Judges Reavley and Garwood conclusively demonstrate to me that certiorari should be granted to consider such a challenge. Consequently, I dissent from the Court’s refusal to consider this broader claim. It may be true, as some have argued, that if the Texas death penalty statute is unconstitutional, the fault lies with this Court rather than with the State. But even if that is so, it is the height of unfairness to make Street-man pay for our mistake.

I dissent.


text:
    January 11, 1988
    No. 87-343.
    Montana et al. v. Crow Tribe of Indians et al.
   Affirmed on appeal from C. A. 9th Cir.

The Chief JusTICE would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.


text:
    No. 87-719.
    Martin v. Georgia Department of Public Safety et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ga. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.

Justice Brennan would postpone further consideration of the question of jurisdiction to a hearing of the case on the merits.


text:
    No. 87-720.
    Hagen, Executrix of the Estate of Hagen v. South Dakota et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. S. D. dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


text:
    No. 87-756.
    Chapman v. Florida.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Fla. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-779.
    Dobard v. City of Oakland et al.
   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. 87-5625.
    August v. County of Los Angeles.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist., dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5731.
    DeNardo v. Williams et al.
   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. 87-5837.
    Boyd v. United States.
   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. 87-5872.
    Spychala v. Morris, Warden.
   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. 87-960.
    Loss v. Supreme Court of Illinois et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. 111. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 87-5504.
    Sarlund v. Wisconsin.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Wis. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 87-5903.
    Moya-Gomez v. Wisconsin.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Wis. dismissed for want of properly presented federal question.


text:
    No. 87-653.
    Government of the Virgin Islands v. JDS Realty Corp.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Court of Appeals to consider the question of mootness.


text:
    No.---.
    Cooper v. Rubin; Mareno v. United States; and American Petrofina Company of Texas v. Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union, Local No. 4-23, et al.
    No.---.
    No.---.
   Motions to direct the Clerk to file petitions for writs of certiorari out of time denied.


text:
    No. A-438.
    Perez et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Application for stay, addressed to The Chief Justice and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-491.
    Georgetown University et al. v. Gay Rights Coalition of Georgetown University Law Center et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Application for stay, presented to The Chief Justice, and by him referred to the Court, denied. The orders entered December 24, 1987, and December 31, 1987, in this case are vacated.

Justice Scalia took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.


text:
    No. D-666.
    In re Disbarment of Keehan.
   It is ordered that M. Patrick Keehan, of Towson, 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. 86-958.
    Norwest Bank Worthington et al. v. Ahlers et ux.
   C. A. 8th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 483 U. S. 1004.] Motion of petitioners for leave to file a reply brief out of time denied.


text:
    No. 86-1052.
    Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk, Administrator of the Estates of Schlunk et al.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 895.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 86-1970.
    Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. Mississippi ex rel. Pittman, Attorney General of Mississippi, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. [Probable jurisdiction postponed, ante, p. 813.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 86-6124.
    Bennett v. Arkansas.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 895.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 86-1145.
    Patrick v. Burget et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument denied.

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


text:
    No. 86-1430.
    Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc., dba Heights Hospital, et al.
   Ct. App. Tex., 1st Dist. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 481 U. S. 1067.] Motion of appellee for leave to file a supplemental brief after argument denied.


text:
    No. 86-1685.
    Florida et al. v. Long et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of Equal Employment Advisory Council et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 86-7113.
    Kadrmas et al. v. Dickinson Public Schools et al.
   Sup. Ct. N. D. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 813.] Motion of North Dakota for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted. Motion of appellees to dismiss appeal denied.


text:
    No. 87-16.
    Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Assn.
   Sup. Ct. Ky. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motions of The Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers and the Florida Bar for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 87-65.
    United States v. Providence Journal Co. et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Further consideration of motion of respondent to dismiss the writ of certiorari deferred to hearing of case on the merits. This case will be heard on oral argument January 20, 1988, in place of No. 86-1387, Mackey et al. v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc. [certiorari granted, 483 U. S. 1004].


text:
    No. 87-82.
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Mallen et al.
   D. C. N. D. Iowa. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 911.] Motion of appellee James E. Mallen for leave to proceed further herein in forma pauperis granted.


text:
    No. 87-363.
    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Martin Exploration Management Co. et al.; and Public Service Commission of the State of New York et al. v. Martin Exploration Management Co. et al.
    No. 87-364.
   C. A. 10th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 962.] Motion of the Solicitor General to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.


text:
    No. 87-517.
    Coe et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of petitioners for leave to file lower court orders under seal granted.


text:
    No. 87-600.
    Variable Annuity Life Insurance Co. et al. v. Otto.
   C. A. 7th Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 87-5096.
    West v. Atkins.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 912.] Motion of American Public Health Association for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 87-5461.
    Henson v. East Lincoln Township et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 923.] Motion of the parties to defer further proceedings granted for 60 days.


text:
    No. 87-5794.
    In re Reardon.
   Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until February 1, 1988, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 45(a) and to submit a petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition in compliance with Rule 33 of the Rules of this Court.

Justice Brennan, Justice Marshall, Justice Blackmun, and Justice Stevens,

dissenting.

For the reasons expressed in Brown v. Herald Co., 464 U. S. 928 (1983), we would deny the petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition without reaching the merits of the motion to proceed informa pauperis.


text:
    No. 87-5840.
    McNamara v. County of San Diego Department of Social Services.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Motion of appellant for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Appellant is allowed until February 1, 1988, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 45(a) and to submit a statement as to jurisdiction in compliance with Rule 33 of the Rules of this Court.


text:
    No. 87-700.
    In re Goodman. In re Sims.
    No. 87-5809.
   C. A. 11th Cir.; and

C. A. 5th Cir. Petitions for writs of common-law certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-5943.
    In re Roby; and In re Oliver.
    No. 87-5992.
   Petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 87-5793.
    In re Montgomery; and In re Teter.
    No. 87-5811.
   Petitions for writs of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 87-5993.
    In re Murry.
   Petition for writ of prohibition denied.


text:
    No. 87-775.
    United Families of America v. Kendrick et al.
   Appeal from D. C. D. C. Probable jurisdiction noted, case consolidated with No. 87-253, Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Kendrick et al. [probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 942], No. 87-431, Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Kendrick et al. [probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 942], and No. 87-462, Kendrick et al. v. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. [probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 942], and a total of one hour allotted for oral argument in these cases.


text:
    No. 87-168.
    Frisby et al. v. Schultz et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 7th Cir. Further consideration of question of jurisdiction postponed to hearing of case on the merits.


text:
    No. 87-498.
    Berkovitz et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 87-645.
    Huffman et al. v. Western Nuclear, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 87-712.
    Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Massachusetts; and Massachusetts v. Bowen, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al.
    No. 87-929.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari granted, cases consolidated, and a total of one hour allotted for oral argument.


text:
    No. 87-519.
    Maynard, Warden, et al. v. Cartwright.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.


text:
    No. 87-578.
    Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States; and Kilpatrick et al. v. United States.
    No. 87-602.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari granted limited to Question 1 presented by each petition, cases consolidated, and a total of one hour allotted for oral argument.


text:
    No. 87-5565.
    Clark v. Jeter.
   Super. Ct. Pa. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 87-5468.
    Johnson v. Mississippi.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted limited to Questions 1 and 2 presented by the petition.


text:
    No. 86-6296.
    Lambert v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-257.
    Martinez v. Lizarribar.
   Super. Ct. P. R. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-289.
    DuPage Bank & Trust Co. v. Property Tax Appeal Board of the Illinois Department of Revenue et al.
   App. Ct. Ill., 2d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-313.
    Paul v. North Carolina.
   Ct. App. N. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-316.
    Allen et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-324.
    Saipaia v. United States.
   Ct. Mil. App. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-347.
    Adams et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-391.
    Chaser Shipping Corp. et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-394.
    Catanese v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-397.
    Independent Community Bankers Association of South Dakota, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-437.
    Pinkney et al. v. Dow Chemical Co. et al.; and Fraticelli et al. v. Dow Chemical Co. et al.
    No. 87-438.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-460.
    Boscio v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-513.
    Manville Forest Products Corp. v. Evans et al.
   Ct. App. La., 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-525.
    Barnes et al. v. Hodel, Secretary of the Interior, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-527.
    Centeno et al. v. Shultz, Secretary of State, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-543.
    Transwestern Pipeline Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-549.
    City of Evanston et al. v. Regional Transportation Authority et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-553.
    McCright v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-562.
    Securities Industry Assn. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-589.
    Fagan v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-590.
    Siflinger v. McLaughlin, Secretary of Labor.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-592.
    Connick, District Attorney for the Parish of Orleans v. Mairena.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-599.
    Masters, Mates & Pilots Pension Plan v. Deak et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-601.
    Bracken v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-616.
    Beck et al. v. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-619.
    Garcia v. United States.
   Ct. Mil. App. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-621.
    California Architectural Building Products, Inc., et al. v. Franciscan Ceramics, Inc., et al.; and Franciscan Ceramics, Inc., et al. v. California Architectural Building Products, Inc., et al.
    No. 87-721.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-646.
    Blondin et al. v. Winner, Judge, United States District Court for the District of Colorado.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-662.
    Cooper v. Williamson County Board of Education et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-677.
    Casazza et al. v. Holbrook.
   Sup. Ct. Conn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-681.
    Rawson v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-686.
    Schlenger v. Schlenger, aka Petricek, Individually and as Trustee of the United Wool Piece Dyeing & Finishing Company Pension Trust, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-689.
    United Transportation Union v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co. et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-694.
    Poitier v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-696.
    Society Ordo Templi Orientis in America et al. v. McMurtry et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-701.
    Brady v. Pettit, Mayor, Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government, et al.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-704.
    Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Litman.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-705.
    Union Pacific Railroad Co. et al. v. Energy Transportation Systems, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-707.
    Johnson v. Alabama.
   Ct. Crim. App. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-709.
    Trudeau et al. v. Wisconsin.
   Sup. Ct. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-713.
    Andrijevic, aka Andrie v. Kelleran et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-715.
    Tufford, dba B & L Pawnshop v. Durgan.
   Super. Ct. Alaska, 4th Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-722.
    Dodd, Administratrix of the Estate of Dodd v. City of Norwich et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 87-724.
    Riddle v. North Carolina.
   Ct. App. N. C. Certiorari denied.