text:
    No. 81-438.
    Basic Bible Church of America, Chapter 8035 v. County of Hennepin.
   Sup. Ct. Minn. Cer-tiorari denied.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    No. 81-447.
    City of Wichita Falls, Texas, et al. v. Stone.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-472.
    Prince George’s County, Maryland v. United States et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-473.
    Billingsly v. Vance et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-481.
    Burnaman v. Singleton.
   Ct. Civ. App. Tex., 9th Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-490.
    Hernandez v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-486.
    Martins Ferry Hospital Assn. v. National Labor Relations Board et al. (two cases).
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-521.
    Bechtel Corp. et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-530.
    Chernabaeff v. Moss et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-542.
    Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-548.
    Koppers Co., Inc. v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-569.
    Cole v. United States et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-570.
    Roberts v. Maryland.
   Ct. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-584.
    Oreck Corp. v. Whirlpool Corp. et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-591.
    Freglette v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-607.
    Weldon v. Hunt et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-608.
    Schlesinger v. Schlesinger.
   Ct. Sp. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-621.
    Taylor et al. v. Graham et al.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-624.
    O’Connell et al. v. Kniskern, Superintendent of Schools of the School District of Mukwonago, et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-629.
    Clark v. Oregon.
   Sup. Ct. Ore. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 81-635.
    O’Connor, by her parents and next friends, O’Connor et ux. v. Board of Education of School District 23 et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-640.
    Berger v. North American Company for Life & Health Insurance.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-641.
    Dependahl et al. v. Kalmanovitz.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-642.
    Bank of Montreal v. Olafsson.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-647.
    Cammisano v. United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-648.
    Amaan et al. v. City of Eureka, Missouri, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Mo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-652.
    Arnold et al. v. CNA Financial Corp.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-654.
    Supanick v. Supanick.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-655.
    Mootz v. Mootz.
   Sup. Ct. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-659.
    DeJames v. Magnificence Carriers, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-662.
    Rosner v. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department of the State of New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-665.
    Union Planters National Bank of Memphis v. J & C Color Industries, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-668.
    Joseph C. Hofgesang Sand Co., Inc. v. Louisville and Jefferson County Board of Zoning Adjustment.
   Sup. Ct. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-670.
    Jones v. Taibbi et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-673.
    Sussli v. City of San Mateo et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-674.
    Griffin, Mayor of Buffalo v. Arthur et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-678.
    Forty-four Hundred East Broadway Co. v. 4400 East Broadway.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-682.
    LeBlanc v. Petco, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-689.
    Grefco, Inc. v. Kewanee Industries, Inc.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-696.
    J. E. Guertin Co. et al. v. Cachat, by her father and natural guardian, Cachat, et al.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-705.
    State Board of Equalization of North Dakota et al. v. Ogilvie, Trustee, et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-714.
    Anderson v. Low Rent Housing Commission of Muscatine, Iowa, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Iowa. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 81-715.
    Bradley et al., t/a Bradley Brothers Cleaners & Launderers v. J. F. Batte & Sons of Richmond, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-740.
    Hennessy Industries, Inc. v. B & J Manufacturing Co.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-744.
    Laka Tool & Stamping Co., Inc. v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-765.
    Lewis v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-780.
    Ackerman et al. v. National Bureau of Standards et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-793.
    Burchinal v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-820.
    Taylor v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5037.
    Fox v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5043.
    Kosinski v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Geauga County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5076.
    Green v. Carlson, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5090.
    Johnson v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5112.
    Rodgers v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5121.
    Olmo et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5205.
    Johnson v. Hilton et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5266.
    Neal v. Hargreaves, Circuit Judge of Lane County, Oregon.
   Sup. Ct. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5274.
    Bagby v. Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5277.
    Cleveland v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5298.
    Swink v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5314.
    Benedict v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5315.
    Brown, aka Wilcox v. Crist, Warden, Montana State Prison, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5427.
    Barden v. Maine.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Me. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5486.
    Chasteen v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5498.
    Johnson v. U. S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5504.
    Galis v. Wainwright, Secretary of the Department of Offender Rehabilitation, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5506.
    Zatko v. U. S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5507.
    McDonald v. Tennessee.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tenn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5508.
    Souness v. Veterans Administration.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5516.
    Ganey et al. v. Edwards et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5518.
    Haywood v. Wolff, Warden, Joliet Penitentiary.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5524.
    Swinick v. Bergman et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5526.
    Africa v. Pennsylvania.
   Super. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5527.
    United States ex rel. Abdus-Sabur v. Cuyler, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5533.
    Thomson v. California.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5536.
    Tucker v. Mississippi.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5537.
    Sphaler v. Wainwright, Superintendent, Lawtey Correctional Institution.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5539.
    Harris v. Estelle.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5541.
    Sutton v. Gaston.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5544.
    Lofton v. Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5545.
    Webb v. Alberto-Culver Co., Inc.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5563.
    Briscoe v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5568.
    In re Zatko.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5569.
    Zatko v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of California et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5570.
    Zatko v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5571.
    Zatko v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5572.
    Zatko v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5574.
    Zatko v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5579.
    Couch v. Black, Superintendent, Kentucky State Reformatory.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5582.
    Stevens v. Allsbrook, Superintendent, Odom Correctional Institution.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5583.
    Meggett v. Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Offender Rehabilitation.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5586.
    Davis v. Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5603.
    Coleman v. Alaska.
   Sup. Ct. Alaska. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5622.
    Hinton v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5627.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5630.
    Beach v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5637.
    Wilkerson v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5639.
    Reichard v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5643.
    Pitts v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5644.
    Hawkins v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5649.
    Maxwell v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5653.
    Trapnell v. Smith, Attorney General, et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5657.
    Knapp v. Beshear, Attorney General of Kentucky.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5662.
    Villar-Medina v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5668.
    Green v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5673.
    Ewell v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-2152.
    Missouri et al. v. Liddell et al.
   C. A.

8th Cir. Motion of respondents Liddell et al. for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Motions of Bayless School District et al.; School District of City of Ladue of St. Louis County, Missouri; and North Kansas City, Missouri, School District for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-113.
    Sowders, Penitentiary Superintendent v. Wiley.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed informa pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-568.
    Texas v. Myers.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed informa pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-276.
    Alvarado v. Inwood Panama, S. A.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed as a seaman granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-321.
    No. 81-421.
    Colville Confederated Tribes v. Walton et al.; and Washington v. United States et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Brennan and Justice White would grant certiorari.

Reported below: 647 F. 2d 42.


text:
    No. 81-587.
    Ewing v. Baumrind.
   Sup. Ct. S. C. Cer-tiorari denied.

Justice Brennan and Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 81-360.
    Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. et al. v. Marsh, Secretary of the Army, et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 81-623.
    Owens et al. v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co. et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 81-666.
    Panter et al. v. Marshall Field & Co. et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of Marshall Field & Co. et al. to strike the brief of the Weiss respondents denied. Certio-rari denied.

Justice Blackmun would grant certiorari. Justice White and Justice Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.


text:
    No. 81-753.
    Trans Tech, Inc. v. Interdynamics, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Motion of petitioner to defer consideration of the petition for certiorari denied. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-677.
    No. 81-681.
    Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. et al. v. Velo-Bind, Inc.; and Velo-Bind, Inc. v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

The Chief Justice and Justice Blackmun took no part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.

Reported below: 647 F. 2d 965.


author: Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall,

text:
    No. 81-5408.
    No. 81-5523.
    McCleskey v. Zant, Superintendent, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center. Ruiz et al. v. Arkansas.
   Super. Ct. Ga., Butts County; and

Sup. Ct. Ark. Certiorari denied. Reported below: No. 81-5523, 273 Ark. 94, 617 S. W. 2d 6.

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. 80-2106.
    No. 80-6514.
    No. 80-6610.
    No. 80-6671.
    No. 80-6786.
    No. 80-6839.
    No. 80-6844.
    No. 81-5227.
    No. 81-5328.
    No. 81-5440.
    General Atomic Co. v. United Nuclear Corp., Hawkins v. Texas, Johnson v. Florida, Tyler v. Georgia, Strickland v. Georgia, Brown v. Georgia, Justus v. Georgia, Lamore v. Inland Division of General Motors Corp. et al., Johl v. Actors’ Equity Assn, et al., Green v. Carlson, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al.,
   ante, p. 878;

ante, p. 919;

ante, p. 882;

ante, p. 882;

ante, p. 882;

ante, p. 882;

ante, p. 882;

ante, p. 900;

ante, p. 903; and

ante, p. 944. Petitions for rehearing denied.

Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.


text:
    No. 80-2014.
    No. 80-2055.
    No. 80-2061.
    No. 80-2113.
    No. 80-2186.
    No. 80-6364.
    No. 80-6624.
    No. 80-6696.
    No. 81-5143.
    No. 80-6710.
    No. 80-6831.
    No. 80-6945.
    No. 81-18.
    No. 81-131.
    No. 81-145.
    No. 81-163.
    No. 81-182.
    No. 81-5004.
    No. 81-5095.
    No. 81-5116.
    No. 81-5149.
    Samara v. United States, White v. United States, Rome v. Kansas ex rel. Commission on Judicial Qualifications, J. W. Bateson, Inc. v. United States, Boyd v. Western Electric et al., Stevens v. Kirkpatrick, Muka v. Cohn et al.; and Muka v. Foley et al., Linden v. Fox et al., Linden v. Dial Press et al., Frazier v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Scott v. Small Business Administration, Kerner v. Haelsig, aka Kerner, Woolridge v. Kentucky, Quinn-Moore et al. v. Lambert, Bank Commissioner of Arkansas, et al., Todd v. United States, Lyon et al. v. California et al., Tahoe Shorezone Representation v. California et al., Ford v. Aldisert et al., In re Sims, Chandler v. Cochran et al., Green v. Allen, Corrections Director, et al.,
   ante, p. 829;

ante, p. 830;

ante, p. 830;

ante, p. 833;

ante, p. 836;

ante, p. 839;

ante, p. 841;

ante, p. 802;

ante, p. 802;

ante, p. 845;

ante, p. 851;

ante, p. 858;

ante, p. 859;

ante, p. 805;

ante, p. 864;

ante, p. 865;

ante, p. 865;

ante, p. 867;

ante, p. 811;

ante, p. 872; and

ante, p. 873. Petitions for rehearing denied.

Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.


text:
    No. 81-5150.
    No. 81-5293.
    No. 81-5294.
    No. 81-5161.
    No. 81-5176.
    Green v. Warden, Federal Correctional Institution, Talledaga, Alabama, et al., Green v. Perrin, Warden, New Hampshire Prison, et al., Green v. Warden, U. S. Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas, et al., Caulton v. Hospital of the Good Samaritan, Quarterman v. Quarterman et al.,
   ante, p. 818;

ante, p. 876;

ante, p. 877;

ante, p. 873; and

ante, p. 874. Petitions for rehearing denied.

Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.


text:
    No. 80-2119.
    Cronen v. City of Galena Park, Texas,
   ante, p. 833. Motion of petitioner to proceed further herein in forma pauperis granted. Petition for rehearing denied.

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


text:
    December 4, 1981
    No. 80-6835.
    Street v. National Broadcasting Co.
   C. A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 815.] Stipulation to dismiss the writ of certiorari was filed, and the case was dismissed pursuant to this Court’s Rule 53.


text:
    December 7, 1981
    No. 81-5280.
    LeMay v. Tennessee.
   Appeal from Ct. Crim. App. Tenn. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5566.
    Denardo v. Murphy.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Alaska dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. A-447.
    In re Myles.
   Application for writ of habeas corpus, addressed to The Chief Justice and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. 89,
    Orig.
    California ex rel. State Lands Commission v. United States.
   Motion of California for summary judgment is consolidated for oral argument with the motion of the United States for judgment on the pleadings. Opening briefs on both motions shall be filed within 45 days from November 30, 1981. Reply briefs, if any, may be filed within 30 days of receipt of the opening briefs. [For earlier order herein, see, e. g., ante, p. 1077.]


text:
    No. 80-2116.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. The order entered November 9, 1981 [ante, p. 1030], is amended to read as follows: Certiorari granted limited to Questions 3 and 4 presented by the petition.


text:
    No. 80-2205.
    Finley, Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois v. Murray.
   C. A. 7th Cir. [Cer-tiorari granted, ante, p. 962.] Motion for appointment of counsel granted, and it is ordered that John S. Elson, Esquire, of Chicago, Ill., be appointed to serve as counsel for respondent in this case.


text:
    No. 81-296.
    In re Rich.
   D. C. W. D. N. C. Petition for common-law writ of certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5617.
    In re Beachboard.
   Petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 81-525.
    Bowen v. United States Postal Service et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-574.
    General Telephone Company of the Southwest v. Falcon.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 80-2211.
    Smith Barney, Harris, Upham & Co., Inc. v. Henricksen.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-6860.
    Williamson v. Williamson.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-69.
    Richards v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-87.
    Moeller v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-151.
    Fine et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir: Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-237.
    Knight v. Tennessee.
   Sup. Ct. Tenn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-241.
    Ward Lumber Co. v. Brooks, Commissioner of Labor of North Carolina.
   Ct. App. N. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-256.
    Moore v. Scurr, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-315.
    Laborers’ International Union of North America, Local No. 89, AFL-CIO v. Piedermann.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-326.
    Fenz v. Burke et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-345.
    McCausland v. Mason County Board of Education et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-351.
    Vetco Inc. et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-376.
    Wright, Judge v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-518.
    Vichos v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-572.
    United Steelworkers of America, Local 8141 v. Tooley et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-686.
    Banerjee v. Board of Trustees of Smith College et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-691.
    Conoco Inc. et al. v. Petrol Stops Northwest.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-697.
    Campbell v. Washington State Bar Assn.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari before judgment denied.


text:
    No. 81-699.
    Addington v. Farmer’s Elevator Mutual Insurance Co.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-700.
    Loesch et al. v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-704.
    Miskinis v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-707.
    Miller v. New Jersey.
   Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-710.
    Schlesinger v. Schlesinger.
   Ct. Sp. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-713.
    James McHugh Construction Co. v. Comptroller of the Treasury, Retail Sales Tax Division, for the State of Maryland.
   Ct. App. Md. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-716.
    American Federation of Television & Radio Artists, Cleveland Local, AFL-CIO v. Storer Broadcasting Co.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-719.
    Maple Properties v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Harris et al., Real Parties in Interest).
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-720.
    Cleveland v. Noland et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-724.
    Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Anderson et al.
   Sup. Ct. Alaska. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-728.
    Price Brothers Co. v. Philadelphia Gear Corp.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-739.
    Simpson v. Kansas.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-747.
    Patterson et al. v. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-767.
    Gage v. Wexler et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-862.
    Roberson v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-866.
    Alvarez-Romero v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5060.
    Johnson v. Louisiana.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5215.
    Zaehringer v. Brewer, Warden.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5243.
    Cotner v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5305.
    Blancett et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5317.
    Austin v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 3d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5333.
    Raysor v. Gabbey et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5517.
    Foster v. Harrison, Warden, Fort Pillow State Farm.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5547.
    Smith v. Ross, Industrial Commissioner of New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 3d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5549.
    Neal v. Court of Appeals of Missouri, Southern District; and Ogle v. Court of Appeals of Missouri, Southern District, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Mo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5550.
    Mokone v. Byrne, Governor of New Jersey, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5553.
    Cosgrove v. Pennsylvania Democratic State Committee et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5555.
    Ladd v. Maine.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Me. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5560.
    Johnson v. Connecticut.
   Sup. Ct. Conn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5564.
    Butler v. Harrington.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5575.
    West v. Austin, Warden, Reidsville State Prison.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5585.
    Lunz v. Jimenez et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5590.
    Zatko v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5591.
    Zatko v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5592.
    Small v. Colorado.
   Sup. Ct. Colo. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5607.
    Torkar v. City of Seattle, Washington.
   Ct. App. Wash. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5593.
    Sellars v. Procunier et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5596.
    Vecchio v. Dorfman et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5598.
    Green v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5599.
    Bell v. Florida.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5608.
    Guzman v. Hongisto et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5609.
    Hall v. Jago et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5611.
    Fowler v. Garrahy, Governor of Rhode Island, et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5631.
    Hooks v. Butterworth.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5654.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5672.
    Allen v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5681.
    Babbe v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5689.
    Moore v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5692.
    Beaman v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5693.
    Campbell v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5697.
    Wilkens et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5699.
    Wilder v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5717.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5720.
    Doloir v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5722.
    Rajai v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5734.
    Nilsen v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


author: Justice Brennan,

text:
    No. 81-187.
    Key et al. v. Wise et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Brennan,

with whom Justice Marshall and Justice Blackmun join,

dissenting.

Petitioners, the Keys, brought this action in the District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi against respondents, the Wises and the United States. They sought to quiet title to 451 acres of land in Humphreys County, Miss., over which the United States had acquired two easements from the Wises. The Federal Quiet Title Act vests exclusive original jurisdiction of such suits in the federal district courts and waives the sovereign immunity of the United States only in respect to such suits. The District Court first denied motions of the Wises and the United States to dismiss the suit. This was correct in light of the Act. But the court then, sua sponte, entered an order of abstention remitting the parties to initiation of an action in the state courts of Mississippi. That order was a patent flouting of the congressional mandate pre-empting state court jurisdiction and requiring the District Court to exercise its original and exclusive jurisdiction. Nonetheless, petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, without filing an opinion, dismissed the appeal and denied petitioners’ motion to stay state court proceedings pending appeal.

The Wises brought suit meanwhile against petitioners in Mississippi Chancery Court, which declared title in the Wises. While the case was pending before the Mississippi Supreme Court, petitioners sought a writ of mandamus from the Court of Appeals to order the District Court to rescind the abstention order. The application was denied by the Court of Appeals, again without opinion. We denied certio-rari sub nom. Key v. Ready, 429 U. S. 1023 (1976). Having failed on their motion to reconsider, on their appeal from the abstention order, and on an extraordinary writ of mandamus, petitioners took the only recourse open to them: They objected to the Chancery Court’s exercise of jurisdiction in the Mississippi Supreme Court on the ground that under the Federal Quiet Title Act the United States District Court had exclusive jurisdiction. The Mississippi Supreme Court rejected petitioners’ pre-emption objection based on the Quiet Title Act on the ground that since the Wises, as plaintiffs in the suit, did not controvert any interest claimed by the United States, the Quiet Title Act was irrelevant to the state court suit. Key v. Wise, 341 So. 2d 1326 (1977).

The District Court’s abstention order directed the parties to return to federal court following final judgment in the state court suit. Accordingly, the parties returned to the District Court. Thereupon the Wises moved to dismiss petitioners’ suit on the ground that the state court judgment was res judicata. Inexplicably, the District Court granted the motion and, even more inexplicably, a divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed. 629 F. 2d 1049 (1980). And today this Court, incomprehensibly, denies the Keys’ petition for certiorari. I respectfully dissent.

The significance of a state court acting in an area of exclusive federal jurisdiction is such that we have held that even a contempt conviction for violation of a state court order in a matter pre-empted by federal law may be void and of no effect. See In re Green, 369 U. S. 689, 692 (1962). Thus, this case is a most obvious candidate for summary reversal, or at the very least for the grant of plenary argument and decision. Even the Government, a prevailing party under the Court of Appeals’ judgment, regards the federal jurisdictional issue of such moment, and the error below so egregious, that the Solicitor General has submitted a memorandum in support of the petition, which states that this is a case in which a federal appellate decision “has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings ... as to call for an exercise of the Court’s power of supervision,” quoting Rule 17.1(a) of this Court’s Rules, and suggests that “the Court may wish to consider summary reversal.” Memorandum for United States 13.

What renders the Court’s denial of the petition particularly inexplicable, indeed incredible, is that the Court of Appeals held that the order of abstention was clearly improper because it patently flouted the mandate of the Quiet Title Act and the District Court’s original and exclusive jurisdiction of the case. Indeed, the Court of Appeals also held that the abstention order was improper because Mississippi property law, although perhaps difficult to ascertain, “was in no sense unsettled.” 629 F. 2d, at 1059. See Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U. S. 800, 813-817 (1976). Finally, the Court of Appeals strongly suggested that the Mississippi Supreme Court had misinterpreted the Quiet Title Act in asserting that the Mississippi courts could exercise jurisdiction of cases within that Act. 629 F. 2d, at 1057-1058. Yet the Court of Appeals’ extraordinary conclusion was that the Mississippi Supreme Court’s decision in favor of its jurisdiction collaterally estopped further consideration of that question upon the parties’ return to the District Court pursuant to the express provision of the abstention order. Id., at 1061-1068.

The Keys were not voluntarily before the Mississippi courts on the question of jurisdiction. The federal courts had denied a motion to reconsider, an appeal, and a motion to stay the state court proceedings. Petitioners continued to pursue their federal court remedies by seeking a writ of mandamus while the case was pending before the Mississippi Supreme Court. Petitioners raised the jurisdictional question in the Mississippi Supreme Court because that was the only forum then open to them to assert their claim that the Quiet Title Act pre-empted state jurisdiction.

Moreover, it is implicit in the abstention order that the District Court made the initial decision that the state courts had jurisdiction notwithstanding the Quiet Title Act. It follows that the District Court was free to review that determination on the parties’ return, or at least that the Court of Appeals was free to review the District Court’s decision.

England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners, 375 U. S. 411 (1964), is precisely applicable to this situation, and compels summary reversal of the Court of Appeals’ judgment, or at the least its plenary review by this Court. England held that while principles of Pullman abstention may require a federal plaintiff to present unsettled questions of state law to the state court for initial determination, the litigant may not be compelled to submit questions offederal law to the state courts. 375 U. S., at 415. Abstention’s “recognition of the role of state courts as the final expositors of state law implies no disregard for the primacy of the federal judiciary in deciding questions of federal law. ” Id., at 415-416. It is certainly obvious that the question of the exclusiveness of the District Court’s jurisdiction in this case is a question of federal law.

Even if petitioners would have been barred from raising the pre-emption claim had they “voluntarily” submitted the federal question to the state court, id., at 421, in no sense can petitioners’ submission in this case of the question of the state court’s subject matter jurisdiction upon pain of waiver, and after the federal courts had denied review, be deemed voluntary. The Federal District Court surely could not, consistent with our abstention cases and with England, send a litigant who properly invoked federal jurisdiction to state court instead for an interpretation of the Federal Quiet Title Act.

The Court of Appeals, however, found its decision supported by the “general rule” of finality of jurisdictional determinations expressed in Durfee v. Duke, 375 U. S. 106, 111 (1963): “ ‘A judgment is entitled to full faith and credit — even as to questions of jurisdiction — when the [second] court’s inquiry discloses that those questions have been fully and fairly litigated and finally decided in the court which rendered the original judgment.’” 629 F. 2d, at 1056. But nothing in Durfee remotely suggests that the District Court should have afforded estoppel effect to the state court’s determination that it had jurisdiction in the face of the explicit provision of the Quiet Title Act to the contrary. Durfee is simply an application of the normal rules of collateral estoppel to jurisdictional determinations. The England procedure meets precisely the situation here, or alternatively is a clear exception to the “general rule” stated in Durfee.

In sum, it is clear that neither the District Court nor the Court of Appeals was bound by the state court’s interpretation of the Quiet Title Act nor was either barred from reconsidering that court’s decision on the federal question. When Congress speaks definitively, as it has in the Quiet Title Act, state courts may not act to obstruct or unsettle the congressional design. Rather, the federal courts were required to enforce the Quiet Title Act, and since that Act preempted the state court’s jurisdiction, petitioners were entitled to an opportunity to establish in the District Court, with federal discovery rules and federal procedures, that they had a superior claim to the disputed land. I would grant the writ for certiorari, reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and remand for further proceedings, or, at the least, grant certiorari and set the case for oral argument.

       28 U. S. C. §§ 1346(f), 2409a (enacted Oct. 25, 1972).
      Title 28 U. S. C. § 2409a provides in pertinent part:
      “(a) The United States may be named as a party defendant in a civil action under this section to adjudicate a disputed title to real property in which the United States claims an interest, other than a security interest or water rights.”
      Title 28 U. S. C. § 1346(f) provides:
      “The district courts shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of civil actions under section 2409a to quiet title to an estate or interest in real property in which an interest is claimed by the United States.”

       The court stated, in rendering the abstention order:
      “The Court is further of the view that as between these private litigants, . . . the state law questions regarding titles to real estate predominate in this case and it is an area in which the Chancery Court of Humphreys County and the Mississippi Supreme Court has [sic] expertise and the parties should repair to those courts for a determination of these questions.” App. to Pet. for Cert. A-39.

       The first abstention order provided that “when any suit filed in the state forum results in a final judgment on the issues involved, this Court will proceed to a final disposition of this action and grant such relief as may then be appropriate.” Id., at A-41. The second abstention order, which was issued when the District Court denied the motion for reconsideration, provided that “upon the final outcome of the litigation instituted by defendants in the Chancery Court of Humphreys County, counsel for plaintiff and defendants [shall] notify this court of the issues then remaining in the cause.” Id., at A-47.

       Certainly the state court’s interpretation of that Act is difficult to harmonize with our interpretation in California v. Arizona, 440 U. S. 59, 66-68 (1979). A further problem is that under the state court’s rendering of the Act a claimant seeking to establish an interest in land adverse to an interest claimed by the United States can lose in state court but can never win because he cannot bind the United States in such an action. That was precisely the circumstance here. In the state court suit the Wises sued the Keys to clear a cloud on the title. But the Keys could not file a counterclaim in the state court to establish their interest in the land, since they would have to join the United States as a defendant. Although the Keys were thus put at risk in the state court proceeding, they could not establish their own interest. As the dissent below noted: “Certainly congressional policy ought not to be flouted by the sheer circumstance of how the case comes out [in the state court]. Exclusivity should be applied with an even hand.” 629 F. 2d, at 1071 (Brown, J.).

       The Court of Appeals’ two earlier decisions in this case would not bar consideration of this issue because neither was necessarily a determination on the merits of the abstention order or the claimed jurisdictional error. See id., at 1055.

         Railroad Comm’n of Texas v. Pullman Co., 312 U. S. 496 (1941).

       As we noted in Durfee, “the general rule of finality of jurisdictional determinations is not without exceptions.” 375 U. S., at 114. Surely “the policy against the court’s acting beyond its jurisdiction,” see Restatement of Conflict of Laws §451(2)(e) (Supp. 1948), cited in Durfee, 375 U. S., at 114, n. 12, is at a maximum where the plaintiff has been erroneously forced from the federal forum where he initiated his suit. Moreover, Durfee recognized specifically that “[djoctrines of federal pre-emption or sovereign immunity may in some contexts be controlling.” Id., at 114.

        Will v. Calvert Fire Ins. Co., 437 U. S. 655, 666 (1978), reserved the question, presented in this case, whether a federal court ever has the power to stay a proceeding in which it has exclusive jurisdiction, pending resolution of a state case. However, at this stage in the present case there is no reason to answer that question.


text:
    No. 81-198.
    No. 81-199.
    Insurance Company of North America v. Forty-eight Insulations, Inc., et al.; and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Forty-eight Insulations, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motions of Walbrook Insurance Co., Ltd., et al.; Alliance of American Insurers; Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.; Keene Corp.; Armstrong World Industries, Inc., et al.; and American Home Assurance Co. et al. for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. Motion of petitioner in No. 81-198 to defer consideration of the petitions for writs of certiorari denied. Certiorari denied.

Justice Brennan and Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions and these petitions.

Reported below: 633 F. 2d 1212 and 657 F. 2d 814.


text:
    No. 81-200.
    Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Porter et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of American Home Assurance Co. et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 81-313.
    Oliver, Warden, et al. v. Harris.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-499.
    Mobil Oil Corp. v. United States Department of Energy et al.
   Temp. Emerg. Ct. App. Motion of Texas City Refining, Inc., for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Certiorari denied.

Justice Brennan would grant certiorari. The order heretofore entered by Justice Brennan on September 3, 1981, is vacated.


author: Justice White,

text:
    No. 81-536.
    Kimble v. D. J. McDuffy, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White,

dissenting.

The first part of 42 U. S. C. § 1985(2) (1976 ed., Supp. Ill) creates a private right of action for damages based on certain forms of interference with federal judicial proceedings:

“If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any party or witness in any court of the United States from attending such court, or from testifying to any matter pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, or to injure such party or witness in his person or property on account of his having so attended or testified.”

The second part of § 1985(2) creates a similar cause of action for interference with state proceedings:

“[I]f two or more persons conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the laws, or to injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing, or attempting to enforce, the right of any person, or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws.”

These two clauses are separated by a semicolon: The lower federal courts have reached conflicting conclusions concerning the effect of that semicolon.

Petitioner was employed as an oil driller by respondent D. J. McDuffy, Inc., from December 1972 until April 1973. In March 1973, McDuffy joined the Industrial Foundation of the South (IFS). IFS is a nonprofit corporation, the purpose of which is to provide information to its members concerning workers’ compensation claims and personal injury lawsuits in state and federal courts filed by employees or prospective employees of the employer/members. Apparently, the employer/members believe that they can reduce their employers’ insurance and workers’ compensation costs by obtaining this information, which may indicate whether a particular employee is likely to be an insurance or compensation risk.

Petitioner alleges that when McDuffy joined IFS, McDuffy learned that petitioner had previously pursued a lawsuit in federal court against a former employer and had obtained a large judgment. Contending that he was fired by McDuffy because of this prior suit, petitioner filed a class action in Federal District Court on behalf of all individuals who had been denied employment by IFS members because they had filed workers’ compensation or personal injury claims against companies in the oil drilling business. The complaint, based entirely on 42 U. S. C. § 1985(2) (1976 ed., Supp. Ill), sought damages for the class and a permanent injunction enjoining the challenged practices. The District Court granted respondents’ motion for summary judgment. It held that the complaint failed to allege facts that would bring this case within either the first or second clause of § 1985(2): A conspiracy by employers to retaliate against employees for filing personal injury suits fails to allege either an intent to deny the equal protection of the laws — required by the second clause — or injury for “having attended or testified in federal court,” 445 F. Supp. 269, 276 (ED La. 1978) — required by the first clause. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed in part. 623 F. 2d 1060 (1980). It held that under the first clause of § 1985(2) — that part of the statute applicable to interference with federal, as opposed to state, court proceedings — there is no requirement of discriminatory animus and that the scope of the term “attended” includes the filing of a complaint in federal court. A petition for rehearing en banc was granted and a severely divided Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court. 648 F. 2d 340 (1981).

By a vote of 11 to 10, the court held that the language of the statute is not as important as its history. Thus, the fact that the phrase “equal protection of the laws” is included in the second, but not the first, part of § 1985(2) is not as relevant to the proper interpretation of the statute as is the fact that all of § 1985(2) is derived from the Ku Klux Act of 1871. Relying in part on this Court’s decision in Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U. S. 88 (1971), the majority held that an action under § 1985(2) must allege a racial or class-based animus. The dissent argued both that Griffin was inapplicable because it dealt only with § 1985(3) and that the intent of the Ku Klux Act of 1871 was broader than the majority suggested: “A major concern was restoration of civil authority and preservation of orderly government, including federal court ability to proceed without improper interference.” 648 F. 2d, at 350. In their view, the second clause of § 1985(2) included the equal protection language because Congress was concerned about the constitutional source of its power to create federal jurisdiction over state torts or crimes. Because Congress had no similar concern over its authority to protect federal-court proceedings, there was no reason for a similar limitation on the first part of the statute.

This dispute over the scope of § 1985(2) has divided not only the judges of the Fifth Circuit, but various other Federal Courts of Appeals as well. The argument of the dissent below was derived largely from McCord v. Bailey, 204 U. S. App. D. C. 334, 636 F. 2d 606 (1980). That court held that “a class-based, invidiously discriminatory intent is [not] an element of a cause of action under the first clause of section 1985(2).” Id., at 342, 636 F. 2d, at 614. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reached a similar conclusion in Brawer v. Horowitz, 535 F. 2d 830, 840 (1976):

“The first half of § 1985(2) aims at conspiracies the object of which is intimidation of or retaliation against parties or witnesses ... in any court of the United States. The federal nexus, then, is not the class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus required by the second half of the subsection, but the connection of the proscribed activities to a federal court.”

On the other hand, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit agrees with the position taken by the Fifth Circuit in this case: “the racial or class-based discrimination rationale expressed by the Supreme Court in Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U. S. 88, 101-102 [(1971),] applies equally to [§1985(2)].” Jones v. United States, 536 F. 2d 269, 271 (1976).

In order to settle this conflict in the Circuits over the scope of a federal remedy for interference with the federal judicial process, I would grant the petition and set the case for plenary consideration.

       Besides McDuffy, the defendants included IFS and all its members.

       The District Court certified a class only with respect to the claim for injunctive relief.

       Judge Clark concurred in the majority’s decision, but stated that it was not necessary to reach this issue.

       An alternative ground for the decision below was the majority’s reversal of the panel’s holding that the filing of a complaint in federal district court falls within the scope of the term “attending” as used in the statute. The fact that the Court of Appeals could have relied solely on this ground to reverse the panel decision does not mitigate the precedential effect of its holding that invidious discrimination must be alleged to state a cause of action under § 1985(2), nor does it lessen the conflict in the Circuits:
      “It does not make a reason given for a conclusion in a case obiter dictum that it is only one of two reasons given for the same conclusion. . . . [W]e can not hold that the use of the section in the opinion is not to be regarded as authority except by directly reversing the decision in that case on that point.” Richmond Co. v. United States, 275 U. S. 331, 340 (1928).
      See also Massachusetts v. United States, 333 U. S. 611, 623 (1948); United States v. Title Ins. Co., 265 U. S. 472, 486 (1924); Union Pacific R. Co. v.
        Mason City & Fort Dodge R. Co., 199 U. S. 160, 166 (1905). In any case, the intended scope of the term “attending” can only be determined by reviewing the same legislative history as is involved in resolving the question of whether an action under § 1985(2) must allege class-based discrimination. Because these two questions are so related, I would grant review of petitioner’s second question as well: Whether the term “attending” includes the filing of a claim in federal court. I would not, however, grant review of petitioner’s third question: Whether offshore workers constitute a “discrete class” for equal protection purposes.


text:
    No. 81-816.
    Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare et al. v. Newfield House, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White and Justice O’Connor would grant certiorari.


author: Justice Brennan, Justice Marshall,

text:
    No. 81-5478.
    Hardy v. Georgia.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Certio-rari denied.

Justice Brennan,

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 certiorari and vacate the death sentence in this case.

Justice Marshall,

dissenting.

Last Term, this Court granted petitioner’s previous petition for certiorari, vacated the judgment of the Georgia Supreme Court affirming the death sentence, and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Godfrey v. Georgia, 446 U. S. 420 (1980). See 449 U. S. 988 (1980). On remand, without the benefit of full briefing and argument requested by petitioner, the State Supreme Court reaffirmed petitioner’s death sentence. Adhering to my view that the death penalty is under all circumstances cruel and unusual punishment forbidden by the Eighth Amendment, I would grant the petition for certiorari in this case and vacate the judgment below insofar as it leaves undisturbed the death sentence. Moreover, even assuming, arguendo, that there are circumstances in which the death penalty may be constitutionally imposed, I believe that the State Supreme Court ignored the mandate of this Court by reaffirming the death sentence in this case. Therefore, essentially for the reasons stated in my dissent from the denial of certiorari in Davis v. Georgia, Spraggins v. Georgia, and Brooks v. Georgia, 451 U. S. 921 (1981), I would grant the petition for certiorari and vacate the judgment below on this additional ground.

Petitioner in this case was sentenced to death after the jury found that the offense of murder was “outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved torture, depravity of mind, or an aggravated battery to the victim” pursuant to Ga. Code §27-2534.1(b)(7) (1978). In Godfrey v. Georgia, supra, this Court recognized that this statutory language is so broad that it invites the jury to impose the death sentence in every murder case. In Godfrey, both the plurality opinion and the opinion concurring in the judgment explained that a State’s capital punishment scheme “must channel the sentencer’s discretion by ‘clear and objective standards’ that provide ‘specific and detailed guidance,’ and that ‘make rationally reviewable the process for imposing a sentence of death.’” 446 U. S., at 428 (emphasis added) (citations omitted). See id., at 437 (MARSHALL, J., concurring in judgment). Under Georgia law, the jury is responsible for sentencing in death penalty cases. Because the Georgia courts had failed to provide the requisite guidance to the sentencing juries, the Godfrey plurality reasoned that the death sentence imposed there had to be vacated.

Following Godfrey, we vacated the judgments in this and several other cases where the death sentence had been imposed after the jury found this statutory aggravating circumstance. On remand, the State Supreme Court has employed the same procedure: it reviews the record to determine whether, if properly instructed, the jury could have found this aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt. I continue to believe that under Godfrey, it is the discretion of the sentencer — in this case the jury — that must be properly narrowed; an appellate court can do no more than guess at what a properly instructed jury might have done. Therefore, I believe that only a new sentencing hearing before a properly instructed jury can accomplish the purpose of our remand for further consideration in light of Godfrey. This is particularly true under Georgia law because, even where the jury finds an aggravating circumstance, it retains the ultimate discretion to refuse to impose the death penalty at all. The procedure employed by the State Supreme Court substitutes that court’s own judgment for that of the sentencer, and is contrary to the mandate of this Court. Therefore, I would grant the petition for certiorari and vacate the judgment below on this additional ground.

      The jury also found, pursuant to the trial court’s charge, a nonstatutory aggravating circumstance — that the offense of murder was committed while the offender was engaged in the commission of a robbery. Although the State Supreme Court recognized that the jury could not impose a sentence of death based on a nonstatutory circumstance, it found no error in the jury’s consideration of this circumstance, and affirmed the death sentence because the jury had found the statutory aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt.


text:
    No. 80-6682.
    Spangenberg v. Wells Fargo Bank, N. A.,
   ante, p. 843. Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.

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


text:
    No. 80-6699.
    No. 80-6917.
    Novel v. Civil Court of the City of New York et al., Johnson v. Gulf Coast Community Service Assn. et al.
   ante, p. 844; and

, ante, p. 856. Petitions for rehearing denied.

Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.


text:
    No. 80-1994.
    No. 80-2114.
    No. 81-98.
    No. 81-112.
    No. 81-284.
    No. 81-368.
    No. 81-443.
    No. 81-5129.
    No. 81-5132.
    No. 81-5336.
    No. 81-5372.
    Nash County Board of Education v. Biltmore Co. et al., Lochiatto et al. v. Florida, Cook et al. v. United States, Michael v. United States, Campbell v. Washington et al., Radio Broadcasting Co. v. Franklin Town Corp. et al., Nicholls v. Nash et al., DeFalco v. United States, Busse v. United States, Martin v. North Carolina, Barfield v. North Carolina,
   ante, p. 878;

ante, p. 880;

ante, p. 894;

ante, p. 950;

ante, p. 897;

ante, p. 941;

ante, p. 942;

ante, p. 942;

ante, p. 971;

ante, p. 933; and

ante, p. 957. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    December 11, 1981
    No. A-480 (81-1042).
    Clements et al. v. Logan.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Application for stay, presented to Justice Rehnquist, and by him referred to the Court, denied. The temporary stay order heretofore entered by Justice Rehnquist on December 9, 1981 [post, p. 1304], is vacated.


text:
    December 14, 1981
    No. 81-367.
    Neilson v. Oklahoma.
   Appeal from Ct. Crim. App. Okla. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-734.
    Central Avenue News, Inc., et al. v. City of Minot et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. N. D. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 81-5499.
    Cohen v. New York City Board of Education et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. N. Y. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5621.
    Johnson v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company of Hartford, Connecticut, et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Wyo. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 81-176.
    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System v. Security Bancorp et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated as moot, and case remanded to the Court of Appeals with instructions to remand the case to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to vacate the administrative decision.


text:
    No. 81-272.
    LaValley et al. v. Northwood Apartments.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Fair Assessment in Real Estate Assn. v. McNary, ante, p. 100.


text:
    No. 81-5134.
    Barksdale v. Blackburn, Warden.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted. The order of dismissal is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of the position presently asserted by the Attorney General of Louisiana and the District Attorney for the Parish of Orleans in their memorandum filed November 2, 1981.


text:
    No. A-479.
    Cappaert Enterprises v. Citizens & Southern International Bank of New Orleans.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Application for stay, addressed to Justice Marshall and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-509 (81-954).
    First Pentecostal Church v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Application for stay and recall of mandate, presented to Justice Blackmun, and by him referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. 83,
    Orig.
    Maryland et al. v. Louisiana.
    [For earlier order herein, see, e. g., ante, p. 809.]
   Motion of the Special Master to be discharged is granted, and it is ordered that John F. Davis, Esquire, be discharged as Special Master.

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


text:
    No. 80-1002.
    Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District, Westchester County, et al. v. Rowley, by her parents, Rowley et ux.
   C. A. 2d Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 961.] Motion of petitioners for divided argument and for additional time for oral argument denied.


text:
    No. 80-1045.
    No. 80-1663.
    Jacksonville Bulk Terminals, Inc., et al. v. International Longshoremen’s Assn. et al. International Longshoremen’s Assn., AFL-CIO, et al. v. Allied International, Inc.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 450 U. S. 1029]; and

C. A. 1st Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of International Longshoremen’s Association et al. for divided argument to permit American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations to present oral argument as ami-cus curiae denied.


text:
    No. 80-1190.
    No. 80-1193.
    Pullman-Standard, a division of Pullman, Inc. v. Swint et al.; and United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Swint et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certio-rari granted, 451 U. S. 906.] Motion of petitioners for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 80-1798.
    No. 80-1808.
    No. 81-91.
    Woelke & Romero Framing, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.; Pacific Northwest Chapter of the Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.; and Oregon-Columbia Chapter, Associated General Contractors of America, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certio-rari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of the parties for divided argument and for additional time for oral argument granted, and a total of 1 hour and 20 minutes allotted for oral argument to be divided as follows: Woelke & Romero Framing, Inc., 20 minutes; National Labor Relations Board, 20 minutes; respondent unions, 20 minutes; and petitioners in Nos. 80-1808 and 81-91, 20 minutes.


text:
    No. 80-2150.
    Finnegan et al. v. Leu et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 813.] Motion of Association for Union Democracy et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 80-2182.
    No. 81-11.
    Inwood Laboratories, Inc., et al. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc.; and Darby Drug Co., Inc., et al. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc.
   C. A. 2d Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 891.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for additional time for oral argument granted, and 10 additional minutes allotted for that purpose. Motion of petitioners for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 81-1.
    No. 81-3.
    Goldsboro Christian Schools, Inc. v. United States; and Bob Jones University v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 892.] Motion of Goldsboro Christian Schools, Inc., for divided argument and for additional time for oral argument denied. Motion of Trent Lott for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae in No. 81-3 granted.


text:
    No. 81-349.
    Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Caterpillar Tractor Co. et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 1029.] Motion of appellees for additional time for oral argument denied. Motion of appellees for divided argument granted.

Justice Powell and Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions.


text:
    No. 81-614.
    Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 1052.] Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed further herein as a seaman granted.


text:
    No. 81-792.
    Hinds et al. v. Consolidated Rail Corp. et al.
   Sp. Ct. R. R. R. A. Motion of petitioners to expedite consideration of the petition and set case for argument in tandem with No. 81-213, Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Hogan et al. [probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 891], denied.


text:
    No. 81-1068.
    Ryan et al. v. Otto et al.
   D. C. N. D. Ill. Appellees are directed to file motions to dismiss or affirm on or before December 31, 1981. In all other respects, the motion of appellants to expedite is denied.

Justice Marshall dissents and would deny the motion to expedite.


text:
    No. 81-5632.
    In re Downs.
   Petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 81-5114.
    Tibbs v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. [Certio-rari granted, ante, p. 963.] Motion of Michael A. Palecki to permit Deborah A. Osmond, of Tampa, Fla., to present oral argument pro hac vice granted.


text:
    No. 81-776.
    Brown et al. v. Socialist Workers ’74 Campaign Committee (Ohio) et al.
   Appeal from D. C. S. D. Ohio. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 81-184.
    United States v. Security Industrial Bank et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 10th Cir. Motion of Beneficial Finance of Kansas, Inc., to consolidate this case with No. 81-150, Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. et al. [probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 1029]; No. 81-546, United States v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. et al. [probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 1029]; and No. 81-583, Beneficial Finance of Kansas, Inc. v. United States et al., denied. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 81-770.
    Blum, Commissioner, Department of Social Services of New York v. Bacon et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of appellees for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 81-451.
    Hathorn et al. v. Lovorn et al.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-534.
    O’Dell et al. v. Espinoza, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Espinoza and as Guardian, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Colo. Motion of respondents for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 80-1396.
    Brandon et al. v. Board of Education of Guilderland School District et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-194.
    NDM Corp. v. Hayes Product, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-301.
    Illinois Health Service, Inc., dba Barclay Hospital v. National Labor Relations Board et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-327.
    Carlson Mooring Service et al. v. Landry et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-399.
    Standard Register Co. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-474.
    North Cambria Fuel Co., Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 81-513.
    Mackowski v. United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-545.
    Travelers Insurance Co. v. Fenasci, Administratrix, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-557.
    Middlebrook v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-667.
    Whelan v. Robbins et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-549.
    Michigan et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-626.
    Brancadora v. Federal National Mortgage Assn.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-657.
    Forman v. City of New Orleans et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-694.
    Cain et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-733.
    Cities Service Gas Co. et al. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-735.
    Union Planters National Bank of Memphis v. Commercial Credit Business Loans, Inc.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-745.
    Valentine v. Smith, Interim President of Arkansas State University, et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-758.
    Jenkins, Administratrix v. Kreiger, Sheriff of Cuyahoga County.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 81-759.
    Checkpoint Systems, Inc. v. Knogo Corp.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-766.
    Underwood v. Securites and Exchange Commission.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-768.
    Pachkofsky v. Oregon, by and through the Port of Portland, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-771.
    Stepanenko v. Van Tassel et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-777.
    Warder et al. v. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-784.
    Pickett et al., Co-Executors and Trustees v. Republic National Bank of Dallas, Trustee.
   Sup. Ct. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-785.
    C. A. May Marine Supply Co. v. Brunswick Corp.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-787.
    Folkerts v. Kansas.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-800.
    Riley v. University of Lowell et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-869.
    Kalmanovitz v. Gutting et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-874.
    Marathon Oil Co. et al. v. Malcolm, formerly dba Spar Oil Co. et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-880.
    Leonard et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-883.
    Jones v. Maryland.
   Ct. Sp. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-887.
    Howard v. Colorado et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-889.
    Harrison v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-913.
    Valerio et al. v. Boise Cascade Corp. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-919.
    Martens v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-946.
    Ness v. United States; Swain v. United States; and Pitt v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied. Reported below: 652 F. 2d 890 (first case); 659 F. 2d 1091 (second and third cases).


text:
    No. 81-948.
    Menius v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5204.
    Bryan v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5396.
    Allen et al. v. Pierce et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5435.
    Noe v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5441.
    Brown v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5461.
    Van Scoy v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5557.
    Gitlitz v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5618.
    Montgomery v. Hargreaves, Circuit Judge of Oregon for the County of Lane.
   Sup. Ct. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5619.
    Massengale, Executor v. Internal Revenue Service et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5620.
    Gates v. Wainwright, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5650.
    Young v. Ralston, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5686.
    Anderson v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5701.
    Frank v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5705.
    Green v. Clemmons et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5727.
    Brown v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5728.
    Dondich v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5730.
    Colmenares-Hernandez v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5741.
    Jackson v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5743.
    Greer v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-1592.
    Pain, Personal Representative of the Estate of Pain, et al. v. United Technologies Corp.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 81-778.
    Southern Railway Co. et al. v. Williams et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

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


text:
    No. 80-1882.
    Chapman et al. v. Dow Chemical Co. et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of Ryan Family et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Certiorari denied.

Justice Blackmun and Justice O’Connor would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 81-598.
    No. 81-5390.
    Austin v. Tennessee. Smith v. Morris.
   Sup. Ct. Tenn.; and

Sup. Ct. Va. Certio-rari denied. Reported below: No. 81-598, 618 S. W. 2d 738; No. 81-5390, 221 Va. cxliii.

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. 81-769.
    Cannon v. University of Chicago et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 81-842.
    Holman v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, aka Amtrak.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certio-rari denied.

Justice White would grant certiorari.


text:
    No. 81-5755.
    McNichols v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-790.
    Scully, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility v. Camera.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-1810.
    No. 81-365.
    No. 81-5374.
    No. 81-5386.
    No. 81-5434.
    No. 81-5438.
    No. 81-5468.
    No. 81-5470.
    Valmas Brothers Shipping, S. A., et al. v. Fisher et al., EA Industries, Inc. v. AMI Industries, Inc., Higgins v. Character and Fitness Committee, Fourth Department, New York Supreme Court, Rogers v. Jinks et al., Allard v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, In re Kulwiec, Sprecher v. United States, Woods v. South Carolina,
   ante, p. 816;

ante, p. 952;

ante, p. 972;

ante, p. 959;

ante, p. 974;

ante, p. 961;

ante, p. 944; and

ante, p. 1058. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 80-1622.
    No. 80-2126.
    No. 80-2136.
    No. 81-5425.
    Grote v. United States, Hunt v. Hunt, Executor, Weber v. Black et al., Pierce v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.,
   ante, p. 819;

ante, p. 834;

ante, p. 834; and

ante, p. 1048. Petitions for rehearing denied.

Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.


text:
    No. 81-5109.
    Rucker v. Regan, Secretary of the Treasury,
   ante, p. 871. Motion for leave to file petition for rehearing denied.

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


text:
    December 18, 1981
    No. 81-412.
    Wilson v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., dba WMC TV Channel 5.
   C. A. 6th Cir. [Cer-tiorari granted, ante, p. 962.] Stipulation to dismiss the writ of certiorari was filed, and the case was dismissed pursuant to this Court’s Rule 53.


text:
    January 5, 1982
    No. 81-928.
    C. Itoh & Co. (America), Inc. v. Spiess et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari dismissed under this Court’s Rule 53.


text:
    January 11, 1982
    No. 80-970.
    Firestone, Secretary of State of Florida, et al. v. Let’s Help Florida et al.
   Affirmed on appeal from C. A. 5th Cir.


text:
    No. 81-1068.
    No. 81-1077.
    Ryan et al. v. Otto et al.; and McClory v. Otto et al.
   Affirmed on appeals from D. C. N. D. Ill.


text:
    No. 80-1945.
    Armed Forces Cooperative Insuring Assn. v. Department of Insurance of Wyoming.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Wyo. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

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


text:
    No. 80-2056.
    F/V American Eagle v. Alaska.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Alaska dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

Justice Brennan and Justice Stevens would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.


text:
    No. 81-219.
    First West Virginia Bancorp., Inc., et al. v. Security National Bank & Trust Co. et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. App. W. Va. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 81-504.
    Sjong v. Alaska.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Alaska dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 81-5640.
    Spikes v. Ohio.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ohio dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 81-293.
    Van Emmerik v. Janklow, Governor of South Dakota, et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. S. D. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

Justice White,

with whom Justice Blackmun joins,

dissenting.

Appellant instituted this action to challenge the constitutionality of Senate Bill 40,1981 S. D. Laws, ch. 102, pp. 243-245, an Act of the South Dakota Legislature which, inter alia, retroactively increased the sales tax on utility services. Beginning in 1967, South Dakota imposed a 3-percent tax on utility services. S. D. Comp. Laws Ann. § 10-45-6 (1967). Retail occupational sales and use taxes were increased to 4 percent in 1969,1969 S. D. Laws, ch. 267, § 1, pp. 366-367, and the State then began to collect sales taxes from utility companies at a rate of 4 percent. Utilities from which the tax was collected sought refunds from the State, and the Supreme Court of South Dakota held that the sales tax on utility services was not changed by the 1969 legislation and that the utilities were entitled to a credit or refund. In re Sales Tax Refund Applications, 298 N. W. 2d 799 (1980). Meanwhile, appellant brought a class action against the State and the utility companies on behalf of all South Dakota residents who paid sales taxes in excess of the legal rate on their utility bills. The Supreme Court ruled that the action against the State was barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity, but that appellant was entitled to seek derivative relief from the utility companies. Van Emmerik v. State, 298 N.W. 2d 804 (1980). The legislature then enacted and the Governor approved Senate Bill 40, effective January 30, 1981, which imposed a 4-percent tax on utility services retroactive to 1969. Appellant immediately filed this suit challenging the constitutionality of the statute on due process and Contract Clause grounds and seeking an order to prevent its enforcement and to require the State to refund excess taxes. Relying principally on United States v. Heinszen & Co., 206 U. S. 370 (1907), and Forbes Pioneer Boat Line v. Board of Comm’rs, 258 U. S. 338 (1922), the Supreme Court held, among other things, that the statute does not violate due process because it is a “curative act.” 304 N.W. 2d 700, 703 (1981).

The difficulty in discerning the difference between permissible curative legislation and unconstitutionally retroactive legislation is apparent from an examination of our cases. A leading example of curative legislation is found in United States v. Heinszen, supra. There a tariff was imposed on goods coming into the Philippines beginning in 1898 when the islands came under the military control of the United States. The treaty ending the Spanish-American War was ratified in 1899, and the Government continued to collect the same tariff. Congress approved and continued the tariff in 1902. After this Court held that there was no authority to collect the tariff from 1899 to 1902, Lincoln v. United States, 202 U. S. 484 (1906), Congress enacted legislation legalizing and ratifying the collection of duties from 1899 to 1902. We held the legislation valid, reasoning that the legislature may “ ‘cure irregularities, and confirm proceedings which without the confirmation would be void, because unauthorized, provided such confirmation does not interfere with intervening rights.’” United States v. Heinszen, supra, at 384, quoting Mattingly v. District of Columbia, 97 U. S. 687, 690 (1878). Government officials also collected certain charges while believing they were authorized to do so in Forbes Pioneer Boat Line v. Board of Comm’rs, supra. There the Board of Commissioners believed they were authorized by statute to collect tolls from boats using a Florida canal. The Florida Supreme Court later held that the Board was without authority to collect the tolls, and the Florida Legislature passed a statute purporting to validate the collection of the tolls retroactively. ■ We held the statute unconstitutional, rejecting the analogy to United States v. Heinszen, supra, and finding that the legislature’s failure to impose tolls at an earlier date barred the legislature from depriving the plaintiff of his right to a refund.

Heinszen and Forbes appear to stand for the proposition that administrative, procedural, and technical defects unrelated to the underlying policy may be remedied by curative legislation, while legislative policy may not be changed retroactively. However, Heinszen and Forbes offer little guidance as to whether a retroactive tax increase constitutes a change in legislative policy. For example, the Court of Appeals of Maryland reached the opposite result from that reached by the lower court in this case when confronted with a similar retroactive tax increase. In Washington National Arena Limited Partnership v. Treasurer, 287 Md. 38, 54, 410 A. 2d 1060, 1069, cert. denied, 449 U. S. 834 (1980), the court held that a retroactive increase in recordation taxes was “wholly inconsistent with the policy set forth in the controlling State statute,” and the petitioners, like the claimants in Forbes, were entitled to refunds as a matter of federal constitutional right.

Just as it is clear that “the principié of curative legislation could, if carried too far, encourage irresponsible official conduct,” it is also clear that it is this Court’s duty to define the boundary between permissible and impermissible retroactive tax increases. The question is hardly insubstantial, the lower courts are in conflict, and the Court’s prior cases fail to furnish adequate guidance. I would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for plenary consideration.

      Slawson, Constitutional and Legislative Considerations in Retroactive Lawmaking, 48 Calif. L. Rev. 216, 239 (1960).


text:
    No. 81-712.
    Blalock et al. v. Florida.
   Appeal from

Sup. Ct. Fla. dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

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


text:
    No. 81-743.
    Cowgill et al. v. Florida.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Fla. dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

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


text:
    No. 81-782.
    Wall et al. v. Florida.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Fla. dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

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


text:
    No. 81-5368.
    Cummings et al. v. Town of Oakland.
   Appeal from Sup. Jud. Ct. Me. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.

Justice Brennan, Justice White, and Justice Powell would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.


text:
    No. 81-5729.
    United States ex rel. Severa v. Board of Review of New Jersey et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. N. J. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5641.
    Fischetti v. Ascione.
   Appeal from Ct. App. N. Y. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5709.
    Wittner v. Cass County Welfare Department et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Minn, dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Justice Brennan and Justice Stevens would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.


text:
    No. A-505.
    Henrique v. United States Marshal et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Application for stay, addressed to Justice Brennan and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-511.
    Gabriel v. United States.
   Application for bail, addressed to Justice Brennan and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-530.
    Thompson v. United States.
   Application for bail, addressed to Justice Marshall and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. 9,
    Orig.
    United States v. Louisiana et al.
    [For earlier proceeding herein, see, e. g., 452 U. S. 726.]
   The Final Accounting of the United States, the corrected Final Accounting of the United States, and the Final Accounting of Louisiana are ordered filed. Objections to the Final Ac-countings are referred to the Special Master.

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


text:
    No. 80-1199.
    American Tobacco Co. et al. v. Patterson et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 452 U. S. 937.] Motion of the Solicitor General to permit David A. Strauss, Esquire, to present oral argument pro hac vice granted.


text:
    No. 80-1257.
    Donald Schriver, Inc., et al. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.,
   451 U. S. 976. Motion of petitioner for expedited consideration of petition for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 80-1417.
    Mills et al. v. Rogers et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. [Certiorari granted sub nom. Okin v. Rogers, 451 U. S. 906.] Motion of New Jersey Department of the Public Advocate for leave to file amicus curiae brief out of time denied.


text:
    No. 80-1663.
    International Longshoremen’s Assn., AFL-CIO, et al. v. Allied International, Inc.
   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 granted.


text:
    No. 80-1991.
    Oregon v. Kennedy.
   Ct. App. Ore. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 891.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 80-1714.
    Hopper, Corrections Commissioner, et al. v. Evans.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted sub nom. Britton v. Evans, 452 U. S. 960.] Motion of respondent to dismiss the writ of certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-2147.
    Connecticut et al. v. Teal et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 813.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 80-1429.
    Youngberg, Superintendent, Pennhurst State School and Hospital, et al. v. Romeo, an incompetent, by his mother and next friend, Romeo.
   C. A. 3d Cir. [Certiorari granted, 451 U. S. 982.] Motion' of Lowell P. Weicker, Jr., et al. for leave to file amici curiae brief out of time denied.


text:
    No. 80-1765.
    American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Inc. v. Hydrolevel Corp.
   C. A. 2d Cir. [Certio-rari granted, 452 U. S. 937.] Motion of Stephen G. Glatzer to reconsider denial of leave to file a brief as amicus curiae denied.


text:
    No. 80-1798.
    No. 80-1808.
    No. 81-91.
    Woelke & Romero Framing, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.; Pacific Northwest Chapter of the Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.; and Oregon-Columbia Chapter, Associated General Contractors of America, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certio-rari granted, ante, p. 814.] Motion of Georgia Power Co. for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 80-2100.
    Rogers et al. v. Lodge et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 811.] Motions of Center for Constitutional Rights et al., Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Georgia Association of Black Elected Officials et al., and NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., et al. for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 80-2178.
    Toll, President, University of Maryland, et al. v. Moreno et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 815.] Motion of petitioners for additional time for oral argument denied. Motion of petitioners for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 80-2195.
    United States v. Goodwin.
   C. A. 4th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 1079.] Motion for appointment of counsel granted, and it is ordered that Paul W. Spence, Esquire, of Baltimore, Md., be appointed to serve as counsel for respondent in this case.


text:
    No. 81-9.
    Washington et al. v. Seattle School District No. 1 et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 890.] Motion of appellees for divided argument denied. Motion of the Solicitor General for divided argument and for additional time for oral argument denied.


text:
    No. 81-55.
    New York v. Ferber.
   Ct. App. N. Y. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 1052.] Motion of Morality in Media, Inc., for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 81-202.
    National Association for the Advancement of Colored People et al. v. Claiborne Hardware Co. et al.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 1030.] Motions of American Jewish Congress and American Civil Liberties Union et al. for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted.

Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions.


text:
    No. 81-280.
    No. 81-330.
    No. 81-331.
    No. 81-332.
    No. 81-333.
    General Building Contractors Assn., Inc. v. Pennsylvania et al.; United Engineers & Constructors, Inc. v. Pennsylvania et al.; Contractors Association of Eastern Pennsylvania et al. v. Pennsylvania et al.; Glasgow, Inc. v. Pennsylvania et al.; and Bechtel Power Corp. v. Pennsylvania et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 939.] Motion of Washington Legal Foundation for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 81-184.
    United States v. Security Industrial Bank et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 1122.] Motion of appellee Beneficial Finance of Kansas, Inc., to enlarge questions presented denied. Motion of the Solicitor General to defer briefing and oral argument denied.


text:
    No. 81-341.
    Greene et al. v. Lindsey et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 938.] Motion of Antioch School of Law et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 81-806.
    No. 81-865.
    Lord et al. v. Local Union No. 2088, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, et al. Metrocentre Improvement District No. 1, City of Little Rock, Arkansas v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
   C. A. 11th Cir.; and

C. A. 8th Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file briefs in these cases expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 81-1097.
    Johnson et al. v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Motion of petitioners to expedite consideration of the petition for cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-5772.
    No. 81-5823.
    In re Irving; and In re Allen.
   Petitions for writs of ha-beas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 81-5455.
    No. 81-5595.
    No. 81-5660.
    No. 81-5695.
    No. 81-5710.
    In re Reynolds; In re Piatt; In re Allen; In re Mitskus; and In re Marzano.
   Petitions for writs of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 81-1004.
    In re Galahad.
   Petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.


text:
    No. 81-554.
    Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Wyoming et al.
   Appeal from D. C. Wyo. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 81-878.
    Larkin et al. v. Grendel’s Den, Inc.
   Appeal from C. A. 1st Cir. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 81-741.
    U. S. Marketing, Inc., et al. v. Idaho et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Idaho. Probable jurisdiction noted limited to Question I presented by the jurisdictional statement.


text:
    No. 81-896.
    Perry Education Assn. v. Perry Local Educators’ Assn. et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 7th Cir. Further consideration of question of jurisdiction postponed to hearing of case on the merits.


text:
    No. 81-430.
    Illinois v. Gates et ux.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-431.
    Guardians Assn. et al. v. Civil Service Commission of the City of New York et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-920.
    Verlinden B. V. v. Central Bank of Nigeria.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-129.
    Landon, District Director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Plasencia.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-420.
    Marshall, Superintendent, Southern Ohio Correctional Facility v. Lonberger.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-298.
    Community Television of Southern California v. Gottfried et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Motion of Corporation for Public Broadcasting et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Certiorari granted limited to Question 2 presented by the petition.


text:
    No. 81-799.
    Federal Communications Commission v. Gottfried et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Motion of Corporation for Public Broadcasting et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 81-334.
    Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of Carpenters et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 81-825.
    Pillsbury Co. et al. v. Conboy.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari granted.

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


text:
    No. 81-5195.
    Jones v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted.

Certiorari Denied. (See also Nos. 81-5368, 81-5641, and 81-5729, supra.)


text:
    No. 80-5896.
    Hall v. Quillen et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-969.
    Firestone, Secretary of State of Florida, et al. v. Dade Voters for a Free Choice et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-1909.
    Heppenstall Co. v. Murphy et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-6303.
    Shaw v. Bernholz et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-6313.
    Butler v. Brasswell.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-6546.
    Stigall v. Cardwell.
   C. A. 4th Cir.

Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80-6820.
    Orpiano v. Parker.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-257.
    Missouri ex rel. Wolff v. Ruddy, Judge.
   Sup. Ct. Mo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-340.
    Pennzoil Co. et al. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-424.
    R.O.C., Inc. v. Brown et al.
   Ct. App. La., 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-437.
    Rudolph v. Louisiana.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-466.
    Sontag v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-483.
    Conklin et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-496.
    Feeney et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-509.
    Duwamish Indian Tribe et al. v. Washington et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-516.
    Stumpff v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-520.
    No. 81-522.
    National Football League v. Federal Communications Commission et al.; and National Association of Broadcasters et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 652 F. 2d 1140.


text:
    No. 81-532.
    Holt v. Wyrick, Warden, Missouri State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-540.
    South Park Independent School District v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-565.
    Connecticut v. Glidden.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-594.
    No. 81-791.
    Newspaper Guild of Wilkes-Barre, Local 120, et al. v. Wilkes-Barre Publishing Co.; and Wilkes-Barre Publishing Co. v. Newspaper Guild of Wilkes-Barre, Local 120, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 647 F. 2d 372.


text:
    No. 81-601.
    No. 81-603.
    Cosmopolitan Broadcasting Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.; and Bulgarian American League et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-615.
    Gray v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-631.
    No. 81-5344.
    Truong Dinh Hung v. United States; and Humphrey v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 629 F. 2d 908 and 667 F. 2d 1105.


text:
    No. 81-633.
    Bass et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-637.
    Baird et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-651.
    Gottfried et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-653.
    Brewer v. United States Postal Service.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-658.
    Pacelli v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-660.
    Addison Savmor, Inc. v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-675.
    White v. Edwards, Secretary of Energy.
   C. C. P. A. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 81-676.
    Barbeau v. Superior Court of California for the County of Contra Costa (Habib, Real Party in Interest).
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Cer-tiorari denied.