author: Justice Rehnquist Justice Blackmun, Justice Brennan,

text:
    MCDONOUGH POWER EQUIPMENT, INC. v. GREENWOOD et al.
    No. 82-958.
    Argued November 28, 1983
    Decided January 18, 1984

      Donald Patterson argued the cause and filed briefs for petitioner.

      Gene E. Schroer argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief was Dan L. Wulz.

        Jerry L. Beane filed a brief for Southern Union Co. as amicus curiae urging affirmance.

   Justice Rehnquist

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Respondents, Billy Greenwood and his parents, sued petitioner McDonough Power Equipment, Inc., to recover damages sustained by Billy when his feet came in contact with the blades of a riding lawnmower manufactured by petitioner. The United States District Court for the District of Kansas entered judgment for petitioner upon a jury verdict and denied respondents’ motion for new trial. On appeal, however, the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed the judgment of the District Court and ordered a new trial. It held that the failure of a juror to respond affirmatively to a question on voir dire seeking to elicit information about previous injuries to members of the juror’s immediate family had “prejudiced the Greenwoods’ right to peremptory challenge,” 687 F. 2d 338, 342 (1982), and that a new trial was necessary to cure this error. We granted certiorari, 462 U. S. 1130 (1983), and now hold that respondents are not entitled to a new trial unless the juror’s failure to disclose denied respondents their right to an impartial jury.

During the voir dire prior to the empaneling of the six-member jury, respondents’ attorney asked prospective jurors the following question:

“Now, how many of you have yourself or any members of your immediate family sustained any severe injury, not necessarily as severe as Billy, but sustained any injuries whether it was an accident at home, or on the farm or at work that resulted in any disability or prolonged pain and suffering, that is you or any members of your immediate family?” App. 19.

Ronald Payton, who eventually became a juror, did not respond to this question, which was addressed to the panel as a whole. After a trial which extended over a 3-week period, the jury found for petitioner McDonough. Four days after judgment was entered for petitioner, respondents moved under local Rule 23A for permission to approach the members of the jury. In support of their motion respondents asserted that they were of “information and belief” that juror Payton’s son may have been injured at one time, a fact which had not been revealed during voir dire. Id., at 68. The District Court ruled that respondents had failed to show just cause to approach the jury. Id., at 73.

Undeterred, the next day respondents filed a second motion for permission to approach the jury, attaching an affidavit from respondent John Greenwood, who asserted that in the course of his employment as a Navy recruiter, he had reviewed the enlistment application of juror Payton’s son. In that application Payton’s son stated that he had been injured in the explosion of a truck tire. The District Court granted respondents permission to approach juror Payton regarding the injuries allegedly sustained by his son. The District Court directed that the inquiry should be brief and polite and made in a manner convenient to the juror. The District Court noted that it was not “overly impressed with the significance of this particular situation.” Id., at 89. No provision was made to record the inquiry of juror Payton.

On the same day that the District Court granted respondents permission to approach juror Payton, respondents moved for a new trial, asserting 18 grounds in justification, including the District Court’s alleged error in denying respondents’ motion to approach the jury. This was the only instance when respondents even tangentially referred the District Court to the juror’s failure to respond as a ground for a new trial. Shortly after the parties placed a telephone conference call to juror Payton, the District Court denied respondents’ motion for a new trial, finding that the “matter was fairly and thoroughly tried and that the jury’s verdict was a just one, well-supported by the evidence.” Id., at 106. The District Court was never informed of the results of the examination of juror Payton, nor did respondents ever directly assert before the District Court that juror Payton’s nondisclosure warranted a new trial.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals proceeded directly to the merits of respondents’ claim that juror Payton’s silence had prejudiced their right to exercise peremptory challenges, rather than remanding the case back to the District Court for a hearing. The Court of Appeals simply recited the recollections of counsel for each party of their conference telephone call with juror Payton contained in their appellate briefs, stating that the “unrevealed information” indicated probable bias “because it revealed a particularly narrow concept of what constitutes a serious injury.” 687 F. 2d, at 343. The Court of Appeals assumed that juror Payton had answered in good faith, but stated:

“Good faith, however, is irrelevant to our inquiry. If an average prospective juror would have disclosed the information, and that information would have been significant and cogent evidence of the juror’s probable bias, a new trial is required to rectify the failure to disclose it.” Ibid, (citation omitted).

This Court has long held that ‘“[a litigant] is entitled to a fair trial but not a perfect one/ for there are no perfect trials.” Brown v. United States, 411 U. S. 223, 231-232 (1973), quoting Bruton v. United States, 391 U. S. 123, 135 (1968), and Lutwak v. United States, 344 U. S. 604, 619 (1953). Trials are costly, not only for the parties, but also for the jurors performing their civic duty and for society which pays the judges and support personnel who manage the trials. It seems doubtful that our judicial system would have the resources to provide litigants with perfect trials, were they possible, and still keep abreast of its constantly increasing caseload. Even this straightforward products liability suit extended over a 3-week period.

We have also come a long way from the time when all trial error was presumed prejudicial and reviewing courts were considered “‘citadels of technicality.’” Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U. S. 750, 759 (1946), quoting Kavanagh, Improvement of Administration of Criminal Justice by Exercise of Judicial Power, 11 A. B. A. J. 217, 222 (1925). The harmless-error rules adopted by this Court and Congress embody the principle that courts should exercise judgment in preference to the automatic reversal for “error” and ignore errors that do not affect the essential fairness of the trial. See Kotteakos, supra, at 759-760. For example, the general rule governing motions for a new trial in the district courts is contained in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 61, which provides:

“No error ... or defect in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted by the court or by any of the parties is ground for granting a new trial or for setting aside a verdict . . . unless refusal to take such action appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice. The court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard any error or defect in the proceeding which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties.” (Emphasis added.)

While in a narrow sense Rule 61 applies only to the district courts, see Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 1, it is well settled that the appellate courts should act in accordance with the salutary policy embodied in Rule 61. See, e. g., Keaton v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., 321 F. 2d 317, 319 (CA7 1963); Box v. Swindle, 306 F. 2d 882, 887 (CA5 1962); De Santa v. Nehi Corp., 171 F. 2d 696, 698 (CA2 1948). Congress has further reinforced the application of Rule 61 by enacting the harmless-error statute, 28 U. S. C. §2111, which applies directly to appellate courts and which incorporates the same principle as that found in Rule 61. See Tipton v. Socony Mobil Oil Co., 375 U. S. 34, 37 (1963); United States v. Borden Co., 347 U. S. 514, 516, and n. 5 (1954).

The ruling of the Court of Appeals in this case must be assessed against this background. One touchstone of a fair trial is an impartial trier of fact — “a jury capable and willing to decide the case solely on the evidence before it.” Smith v. Phillips, 455 U. S. 209, 217 (1982). Voir dire examination serves to protect that right by exposing possible biases, both known and unknown, on the part of potential jurors. Demonstrated bias in the responses to questions on voir dire may result in a juror’s being excused for cause; hints of bias not sufficient to warrant challenge for cause may assist parties in exercising their peremptory challenges. The necessity of truthful answers by prospective jurors if this process is to serve its purpose is obvious.

The critical question posed to juror Payton in this case asked about “injuries . . . that resulted in any disability or prolonged pain or suffering.” App. 19. Juror Payton apparently believed that his son’s broken leg sustained as a result of an exploding tire was not such an injury. In response to a similar question from petitioner’s counsel, however, another juror related such a minor incident as the fact that his 6-year-old son once caught his finger in a bike chain. Id., at 52. Yet another juror failed to respond to the question posed to juror Payton, and only the subsequent questioning of petitioner’s counsel brought out that her husband had been injured in a machinery accident. Id., at 19, 53-54.

The varied responses to respondents’ question on voir dire testify to the fact that jurors are not necessarily experts in English usage. Called as they are from all walks of life, many may be uncertain as to the meaning of terms which are relatively easily understood by lawyers and judges. Moreover, the statutory qualifications for jurors require only a minimal competency in the English language. 28 U. S. C. § 1865 (1976 ed. and Supp. Y). Thus, we cannot say, and we doubt that the Court of Appeals could say, which of these three jurors was closer to the “average juror” in his or her response to the question, but it is evident that such a standard is difficult to apply and productive of uncertainties.

To invalidate the result of a 3-week trial because of a juror’s mistaken, though honest, response to a question, is to insist on something closer to perfection than our judicial system can be expected to give. A trial represents an important investment of private and social resources, and it ill serves the important end of finality to wipe the slate clean simply to recreate the peremptory challenge process because counsel lacked an item of information which objectively he should have obtained from a juror on voir dire examination. Whatever the merits of the Court of Appeals’ standard in a world which would redo and reconstruct what had gone before upon any evidence of abstract imperfection, we think it is contrary to the practical necessities of judicial management reflected in Rule 61 and § 2111. We hold that to obtain a new trial in such a situation, a party must first demonstrate that a juror failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire, and then further show that a correct response would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause. The motives for concealing information may vary, but only those reasons that affect a juror’s impartiality can truly be said to affect the fairness of a trial.

Generally, motions for a new trial are committed to the discretion of the district court. Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Duncan, 311 U. S. 243, 251 (1940). The Court of Appeals was mistaken in deciding as it did that respondents were entitled to a new trial. In the event that the issue remains relevant after the Court of Appeals has disposed of respondents’ other contentions on appeal, the District Court may hold a hearing to determine whether respondents are entitled to a new trial under the principles we state here. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is

Reversed.

Justice Blackmun,

with whom Justice Stevens and Justice O’Connor join,

concurring.

I agree with the Court that the proper inquiry in this case is whether the plaintiffs had the benefit of an impartial trier of fact. I also agree that, in most eases, the honesty or dishonesty of a juror’s response is the best initial indicator of whether the juror in fact was impartial. I therefore join the Court’s opinion, but I write separately to state that I understand the Court’s holding not to foreclose the normal avenue of relief available to a party who is asserting that he did not have the benefit of an impartial jury. Thus, regardless of whether a juror’s answer is honest or dishonest, it remains within a trial court’s option, in determining whether a jury was biased, to order a post-trial hearing at which the movant has the opportunity to demonstrate actual bias or, in exceptional circumstances, that the facts are such that bias is to be inferred. See Smith v. Phillips, 455 U. S. 209, 215-216 (1982); id., at 221-224 (O’Connor, J., concurring).

Justice Brennan,

with whom Justice Marshall joins,

concurring in the judgment.

I agree with the Court that the Court of Appeals employed an erroneous legal standard to determine whether a new trial was required in this case, and that the Court of Appeals compounded that error by failing to remand the case to the District Court for a hearing and decision on the motion for new trial in the first instance. I concur only in the judgment, however, because I have difficulty understanding the import of the legal standard adopted by the Court.

The Court of Appeals ordered a new trial because Ronald Payton, who later was chosen as jury foreman, incorrectly answered an important question posed to prospective jurors on voir dire. Specifically, although asked whether any family members had “sustained any injuries . . . that resulted in any disability or prolonged pain or suffering,” Payton failed to disclose a previous injury his son had incurred in a truck-tire explosion. The court concluded that, because the information available to counsel during voir dire was erroneous, Payton’s failure to respond “prejudiced the Greenwoods’ right to peremptory challenge.” 687 F. 2d 338, 342 (CA10 1982). It therefore held that the Greenwoods’ motion for a new trial should have been granted, and entered judgment granting the motion.

I agree with the Court that a finding that less than complete information was available to counsel conducting voir dire does not by itself require a new trial. I cannot join, however, in the legal standard asserted by the Court’s opinion. In my view, the proper focus when ruling on a motion for new trial in this situation should be on the bias of the juror and the resulting prejudice to the litigant. More specifically, to be awarded a new trial, a litigant should be required to demonstrate that the juror incorrectly responded to a material question on voir dire, and that, under the facts and circumstances surrounding the particular case, the juror was biased against the moving litigant. See, e. g., McCoy v. Goldston, 652 F. 2d 654, 659-660 (CA6 1981).

When applying this standard, a court should recognize that “[t]he bias of a prospective juror may be actual or implied; that is, it may be bias in fact or bias conclusively presumed as [a] matter of law.” United States v. Wood, 299 U. S. 123, 133 (1936). See also Smith v. Phillips, 455 U. S. 209, 221-224 (1982) (O’Connor, J., concurring). Because the bias of a juror will rarely be admitted by the juror himself, “partly because the juror may have an interest in concealing his own bias and partly because the juror may be unaware of it,” id., at 221-222, it necessarily must be inferred from surrounding facts and circumstances. Therefore, for a court to determine properly whether bias exists, it must consider at least two questions: are there any facts in the case suggesting that bias should be conclusively presumed; and, if not, is it more probable than not that the juror was actually biased against the litigant. Whether the juror answered a particular question on voir dire honestly or dishonestly, or whether an inaccurate answer was inadvertent or intentional, are simply factors to be considered in this latter determination of actual bias. I therefore cannot agree with the Court when it asserts that a new trial is not warranted whenever a prospective juror provides an honest answer to the question posed. Cf. ante, at 556. One easily can imagine cases in which a prospective juror provides what he subjectively believes to be an honest answer, yet that same answer is objectively incorrect and therefore suggests that the individual would be a biased juror in the particular case.

Given the nature of this legal standard, and given that no claim is raised in this case that bias should be conclusively presumed, the Court of Appeals clearly erred by deciding the issue of juror bias itself rather than remanding the issue to the District Court for a hearing and decision in the first instance. Motions for new trial on the basis of juror bias are left to the sound discretion of the trial court, and its determination should not be lightly disturbed by an appellate court. This is especially true when decision on the motion turns, as it does here, on the particular facts and circumstances involved. See ante, at 551-552, n. 3, and 556. The trial court in this case, however, did not reach the point of exercising discretion because it never was notified about the results of the informal examination of juror Payton. Accordingly, the case should be remanded to the District Court for a hearing and decision consistent with the principles outlined above.

       Although respondents sued only petitioner McDonough, under Kansas law, which applied in this diversity action, the jury was permitted to consider the relative fault of three nondefendants: Jeff Morris, a next-door neighbor who was operating the lawnmower involved in the accident, Jeff’s father, and Billy’s mother. The jury assessed Billy’s damages in the amount of $375,000, and found Jeff Morris 20% at fault, Jeff’s father 45% at fault, and Billy’s mother 35% at fault. The jury determined that petitioner McDonough’s percentage of fault was zero.

       It is not clear from the opinion of the Court of Appeals whether the information stated in Greenwood’s affidavit was known to respondents or their counsel at the time of the voir dire examination. If it were, of course, respondents would be barred from later challenging the composition of the jury when they had chosen not to interrogate juror Payton further upon receiving an answer which they thought to be factually incorrect. See Johnson v. Hill, 274 F. 2d 110, 115-116 (CA8 1960).

       Although neither party challenges the propriety of the Court of Appeals’ having disposed of the question on the merits, we believe that the proper resolution of the legal issue should be made by the District Court. See infra, at 556. Nevertheless, we address the issue in order to correct the legal standard the District Court should apply upon remand.
      Both parties apparently agree that during the telephone conversation with juror Payton, he related that his son had received a broken leg as the result of an exploding tire. Counsel for respondents in their brief to the Court of Appeals recalled Payton saying that “ ‘it did not make any difference whether his son had been in an accident and was seriously injured,’ ” “ ‘that having accidents are a part of life,’ ” and that “ ‘all his children have been involved in accidents.’ ” Brief for Appellants in No. 80-1698 (CA10), p. 7. Counsel for petitioners recall Payton as saying that he “did not regard [his son’s broken leg] as a ‘severe’ injury and as he understood the question [the injury] did not result in any ‘disability or prolonged pain and suffering.' As far as Mr. Payton is concerned he answered counsel’s question honestly, and correctly, by remaining silent.” Brief for Appellee in No. 80-1698 (CA10), p. 18.
      Nevertheless, the manner in which the parties presented the issue of juror Payton’s failure to respond on voir dire was highly unorthodox. While considerations of judicial economy might have motivated the Court of Appeals in this case to proceed directly to the issue of the effect of juror Payton’s nondisclosure, in cases in which a party is asserting a ground for new trial, the normal procedure is to remand such issues to the district court for resolution. Although petitioner does not dispute respondents’ version of the telephone call to juror Payton, it is foreseeable that in another such case, the parties could present the appellate court with a continuing, difficult factual dispute. Appellate tribunals are poor substitutes for trial courts for developing a record or resolving factual controversies.

       The text of 28 U. S. C. § 2111 reads in full:
      “On the hearing of any appeal or writ of certiorari in any case, the court shall give judgment after an examination of the record without regard to errors or defects which do not affect the substantial rights of the parties.”
      This provision traces its lineage to the harmless-error provision of § 269 of the former Judicial Code, which was enacted in 1919. Act of Feb. 26, 1919, ch. 48, 40 Stat. 1181; see Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U. S. 750, 758-762 (1946); C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure §2881 (1973).

      The Court of Appeals recognized several other factors in this case, not completely acknowledged by the Court’s opinion, which might suggest that juror Payton was biased or that his potential bias resulted in prejudice to the Greenwoods. For example, by claiming during his informal examination after trial that “having accidents are a part of life,” Payton may have displayed insufficient sensitivity to the Greenwoods’ claims in this product liability action. This potential bias could only have been exacerbated by the fact that Payton served as foreman of the jury. Moreover, the jury initially returned a verdict assessing $0.00 in damages despite the fact that Billy Greenwood lost both his feet in the lawnmower accident; only upon reconvening after being admonished by the trial judge did the jury assess damages totaling $375,000. These factors should be considered along with any other relevant facts and circumstances by the District Court on remand.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    October 3, 1983
    No. 82-1840.
    Kirksey et al. v. Mississippi et al.
   Affirmed on appeal from D. C. D. C.

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


text:
    No. 82-370.
    Carpenter v. Hammond, Governor of Alaska.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Alaska dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-1710.
    Fox Ridge Associates & Co. v. Board of Assessors of Marshfield.
   Appeal from Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass, dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-1821.
    No. 82-1835.
    Exxon Corp. et al. v. Eagerton, Commissioner of Revenue of Alabama, et al.; and Union Oil Company of California et al. v. Eagerton, Commissioner of Revenue of Alabama.
   Appeals from Sup. Ct. Ala. dismissed for want of substantial federal question. Reported below: 426 So. 2d 814.


text:
    No. 82-1946.
    Oyster v. Oyster.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ya. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-2016.
    Solyom v. Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission.
   Appeal from Ct. Sp. App. Md. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-2059.
    Bartlett et al. v. Williams et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Conn, dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-2116.
    Dalgety Foods, Inc. v. Avina.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-2124.
    Archer et al. v. Metropolitan Transit Authority et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Tex., 3d Sup. Jud. Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-2125.
    Metropolitan Package Store Assn., Inc., et al. v. Koch, Mayor of the City of New York, et al.
   Appeal from App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 3d Jud. Dept., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-6732.
    Felix v. New York.
   Appeal from Ct. App. N. Y. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-7019.
    Secrest v. South Dakota.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. S. D. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 83-43.
    Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. Public Utilities Commission of Ohio et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ohio dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 83-48.
    Dunlap et al. v. Illinois.
   Appeal from App. Ct. Ill., 5th Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 83-174.
    Angel et al. v. Midlam et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist., dismissed for want of substantial federal question.


text:
    No. 82-1156.
    Teledyne Movible Offshore, Inc., et al. v. Thompson.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. La. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

Justice Powell, Justice Rehnquist, and Justice O’Connor would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.


text:
    No. 82-1499.
    Marquez v. Texas.
   Appeal from Ct. Crim. App. Tex. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certio-rari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1856.
    Anderson v. Fisher et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 9th Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of cer-tiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1947.
    Koker et ux. v. Betts et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Wash, dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of cer-tiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2049.
    Jojola v. New Mexico ex rel. Human Services Department.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. N. M. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2054.
    Falkenhan v. Pennsylvania.
   Appeal from Super. Ct. Pa. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of cer-tiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2096.
    Moore v. Khourie et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 9th Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2099.
    Giuliani v. Chuck.
   Appeal from Int. Ct. App. Haw. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2115.
    First National Bank & Trust Company of Evanston, Trustee v. Rosewell, County Treasurer of Cook County, et al.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ill. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2132.
    Lewellen et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   Appeal from C. A. 1st Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6720.
    Ogrod v. Tomlinson Court Apartments.
   Appeal from C. A. 3d Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6721.
    Ogrod et al. v. School District of Philadelphia.
   Appeal from C. A. 3d Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6783.
    Spence v. Rodgers et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 4th Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6850.
    Ogrod v. Weiss et al. (two cases).
   Appeals from C. A. 3d Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeals were taken as petitions for writs of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6989.
    Linden v. New York.
   Appeal from C. A. 2d Cir. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-19.
    Crane et ux. v. Michigan et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Mich, dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of cer-tiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-5072.
    Weigang v. Silverman et al.
   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.


text:
    No. 83-5199.
    Ogrod v. Weiss et al.
   Appeal from D. C. E. D. Pa. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1868.
    Arnold Transit Co., Inc., et al. v. City of Mackinac Island.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Mich, dismissed for want of substantial federal question. Justice Stevens would note probable jurisdiction and set case for oral argument.


text:
    No. 82-2005.
    Watkins v. Roche.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ga. dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


text:
    No. 82-2070.
    International Society for Krishna Consciousness v. Marsland, Prosecuting Attorney, City and County of Honolulu.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Haw. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

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


text:
    No. 82-6950.
    Santiago v. Pennsylvania.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Pa. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

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


text:
    No. 83-6.
    Besadny, Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, et al. v. Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians et al.
   Appeal from C. A. 7th Cir. 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 Marshall, and Justice Stevens would affirm the judgment.


text:
    No. 83-91.
    Aptos Seascape Corp. v. County of Santa Cruz et al.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist., dismissed for want of a final judgment.


text:
    No. 82-6583.
    Daniel v. Collier.
   Appeal from Ct. App. Mich. Motion of appellant for leave to proceed informa pauperis granted. Judgment vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of Pickett v. Brown, 462 U. S. 1 (1983).


text:
    No. 82-1705.
    National Labor Relations Board v. New York University Medical Center et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir.

Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of NLRB v. Transportation Management Corp., 462 U. S. 393 (1983).


text:
    No. 82-1828.
    United States Environmental Protection Agency v. Northern Plains Resource Council et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of Ruekelshaus v. Sierra Club, 463 U. S. 680 (1983).


text:
    No. 82-1944.
    United States v. Gonsalves.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of United States v. Hasting, 461 U. S. 499 (1983).


text:
    No. 82-1975.
    District 1199, National Union of Hospital & Health Care Employees, a Division of Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Union, AFL-CIO v. Assad et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of DelCostello v. Teamsters, 462 U. S. 151 (1983).


text:
    No. 82-1870.
    Mianecki et al. v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada et al.
   Sup. Ct. Nev. Cer-tiorari dismissed for want of a final judgment.


text:
    No.-.
    In re Freeman.
   Motion to direct the Clerk to file the petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No.-.
    Heflin et al. v. Kentucky State Racing Commission et al.
   Motion to direct the Clerk to file the petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.


text:
    No.-.
    Smith, Personal Representative of the Estate of Olson v. United States.
   Motion to direct the Clerk to file the petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.


text:
    No. A-108.
    Henry S. Branscome, Inc., et al. v. United States.
   Application for stay of the mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, presented to Jus-

tice Brennan, and by him referred to the Court, denied.

The order, heretofore entered by Justice Brennan, is vacated.


text:
    No. A-115.
    Noble v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Application for stay of mandate, addressed to Justice Rehn-QUIST and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-162.
    Clarksdale Baptist Church v. Green et al.
   D. C. D. C. Application for stay pending appeal, addressed to Justice Powell and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-182 (83-334).
    Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County, Alabama, et al. v. Brown et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Application for stay of enforcement of judgment, addressed to Justice Stevens and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. A-186.
    Kemp, Superintendent, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center v. Smith.
   Application to vacate the stay of execution of sentence of death, addressed to The Chief Justice and referred to the Court, denied.


text:
    No. D-216.
    In re Mehta,
   451 U. S. 903. Application for readmission to the Bar of this Court denied.


text:
    No. D-280.
    In re Stern,
   460 U. S. 1008. Application for

admission to the Bar of this Court, presented to Justice Marshall, and by him referred to the Court, denied.

JUSTICE MARSHALL and Justice Stevens would grant the application.


text:
    No. D-339.
    In re Disbarment of Leibowitz.
    [For earlier order herein, see 461 U. S. 922.]
   Disbarment entered.


text:
    No. D-343.
    In re Disbarment of McGrath.
    [For earlier order herein, see 461 U. S. 941.]
   Disbarment entered.


text:
    No. D-350.
    In re Disbarment of Bucci.
    [For earlier order herein, see 461 U. S. 954.]
   Disbarment entered.


text:
    No. D-356.
    In re Disbarment of Gordon.
    [For earlier order herein, see 462 U, S. 1103.]
   Disbarment entered.


text:
    No. D-362.
    In re Disbarment of Crane.
    [For earlier order herein, see 462 U. S. 1114.]
   Disbarment entered.


text:
    No. 94,
    Orig.
    South Carolina v. Regan, Secretary of the Treasury.
    [For earlier order herein, see 462 U. S. 1114.]
   Motion of the defendant for leave to file a supplemental memorandum granted. Motion of the plaintiff for leave to file a supplemental memorandum granted. Motion of plaintiff and Texas for divided argument granted. Motion of National Association of Counties et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 81-1885.
    District of Columbia Court of Appeals et al. v. Feldman et al.,
   460 U. S. 462. Motion of respondents to retax costs denied.


text:
    No. 81-2149.
    Solem, Warden, South Dakota State Penitentiary v. Stumes.
   C. A. 8th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 463 U. S. 1228.] Motion for appointment of counsel granted, and it is ordered that Timothy J. McGreevy, Esquire, of Sioux Falls, S. D., be appointed to serve as counsel for respondent in this case.


text:
    No. 82-52.
    Arizona Governing Committee for Tax Deferred Annuity and Deferred Compensation Plans et al. v. Norris,
   468 U. S. 1073. Motion of respondent to retax costs denied.


text:
    No. 82-206.
    No. 82-229.
    Firefighters Local Union No. 1784 v. Stotts et al.; and Memphis Fire Department et al. v. Stotts et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 462 U. S. 1105.] Motion of petitioners for divided argument denied. Motion of respondents for divided argument and for additional time for oral argument denied. Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted, and 10 minutes of petitioners’ time for oral argument is allotted for that purpose.


text:
    No. 82-282.
    McCain et al. v. Lybrand et al.
   D. C. S. C. [Probable jurisdiction noted, 462 U. S. 1130.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 82-792.
    Grove City College et al. v. Bell, Secretary of Education, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1199.] Motion of American Association of University Women et al. to reconsider order denying motion for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae [463 U. S. 1235] denied.


text:
    No. 82-945.
    Sure-Tan, Inc., et al. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 7th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 460 U. S. 1021.] Motion of Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-1031.
    Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 et al. v. Hyde.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 460 U. S. 1021.] Motion of American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc., for leave to file out-of-time motion for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 82-1074.
    American Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. Pettway et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Motion of the parties to defer consideration of the petition for writ of certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1135.
    Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections v. Wiggins.
   C. A. 5th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 459 U. S. 1199.] Motion of respondent pro se for leave to file supplemental brief on the merits granted.


text:
    No. 82-1150.
    Ellis et al. v. Brotherhood of Railway, Airline & Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express & Station Employes et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 460 U. S. 1080.] Motion of State Bar of California for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-1186.
    No. 82-1465.
    Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Franklin Mint Corp. et al.; and Franklin Mint Corp. et al. v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
   C. A. 2d Cir. [Certiorari granted, 462 U. S. 1118.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 82-1213.
    New York v. Quarles.
   Ct. App. N. Y. [Cer-tiorari granted, 461 U. S. 942.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 82-1253.
    Solem, Warden, South Dakota State Penitentiary, et al. v. Bartlett.
   C. A. 8th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 461 U. S. 956.] Motion of Dewey County, South Dakota, et al. for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for divided argument granted. Request for additional time for oral argument denied.


text:
    No. 82-1260.
    Copperweld Corp. et al. v. Independence Tube Corp.
   C. A. 7th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 462 U. S. 1131.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted, and 10 minutes of petitioners’ time for oral argument is allotted for that purpose.

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


text:
    No. 82-1349.
    No. 82-1350.
    United States v. S.A. Empresa de Viacao Aerea Rio Grandense (Varig Airlines) et al.; and United States v. United Scottish Insurance Co. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 461 U. S. 925.] Motion of respondents for divided argument denied.


text:
    No. 82-1474.
    Hoover et al. v. Ronwin et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 461 U. S. 926.] Motions of National Conference of Bar Examiners and State Bar of California for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted.

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


text:
    No. 82-1554.
    Strickland, Superintendent, Florida State Prison, et al. v. Washington.
   C. A. 11th Cir. [Cer-tiorari granted, 462 U. S. 1105.] Motion of Washington Legal Foundation for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-1591.
    Ruckelshaus, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. [Certiorari granted, 461 U. S. 956.] Motion of American Gas Association for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-1651.
    Nix, Warden of the Iowa State Penitentiary v. Williams.
   C. A. 8th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 461 U. S. 956.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.


text:
    No. 82-1711.
    Colorado v. Quintero.
   Sup. Ct. Colo. [Cer-tiorari granted, 463 U. S. 1206.] Motion of Appellate Committee of the California District Attorneys Association et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted.


text:
    No. 82-1770.
    National Enquirer, Inc. v. Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles (Jones et al., Real Parties in Interest),
   462 U. S. 1144. Respondent Jones is requested to file a response to the petition for rehearing within 30 days.


text:
    No. 82-2157.
    Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund, et al. v. Central Transport, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Motions of Arthur Young & Co., Bricklayers

Fringe Benefit Funds-Metropolitan Area et al., and National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 82-1876.
    No. 82-1888.
    No. 82-1899.
    No. 82-1938.
    No. 82-2128.
    Foremost Pro Color, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co. Volkswagenwerk A. G. v. Falzon et al., Individually and as Next Friends of Falzon et al. Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. New York State Human Rights Appeal Board et al. California et al. v. Standard Oil Company of California et al. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. et al. v. Litton Systems, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir.;

Sup. Ct. Mich.;

Ct. App. N. Y.;

C. A. 9th Cir.; and

C. A. 2d Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file briefs in these cases expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 82-6502.
    In re Rush,
   462 U. S. 1117. Motion of petitioner to reconsider order denying leave to proceed informa pau-peris denied.


text:
    No. 82-6702.
    Ganey v. Safron et al.,
   463 U. S. 1205. Motion of petitioner to reconsider order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.


text:
    No. 82-6854.
    In re Nakagawa.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Petition for writ of common-law certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6883
    No. 82-6900
    No. 82-6901
    No. 82-6983
    No. 83-5094
    In re Smith; In re Timson; In re Pavilonis; In re Courtney; and In re Gibson.
   Petitions for writs of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 82-6816.
    No. 82-6857.
    In re McDonald; and In re Sims.
   Petitions for writs of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.


text:
    No. 83-89.
    In re Thomassen.
   Motion of petitioner to expedite consideration of the petition for writ of mandamus denied. Petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 82-6887.
    No. 82-6999.
    In re Hallstrom; and In re Dearing.
   Petitions for writs of prohibition denied.


text:
    No. 82-1579.
    Hayfield Northern Railroad Co., Inc., et al. v. Chicago & North Western Transportation Co.
   Appeal from C. A. 8th Cir. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 82-1913.
    No. 82-1951.
    Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority et al.; and Donovan, Secretary of Labor v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority et al.
   Appeals from D. C. W. D. Tex. Probable jurisdiction noted, cases consolidated, and a total of one hour allotted for oral argument.


text:
    No. 82-1721.
    Seattle Times Co., dba The Seattle Times, et al. v. Rhinehart et al.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1724.
    New York v. Uplinger et al.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1766.
    Securities Industry Assn. et al. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1845.
    Colorado v. Nunez.
   Sup. Ct. Colo. Certio-rari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1925.
    United States Department of State et al. v. Washington Post Co.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1998.
    Watt, Secretary of the Interior, et al. v. Community for Creative Non-Violence et al.
   C. A. D. C.

Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 83-56.
    Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Community Health Services of Crawford County, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 83-87.
    Board of Education of Paris Union School District No. 95 et al. v. Vail.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 83-96.
    Limbach, Tax Commissioner of Ohio v. Hooven & Allison Co.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 83-219.
    McDonald v. City of West Branch, Michigan, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1795.
    Capital Cities Cable, Inc., et al. v. Crisp, Director, Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari granted. In addition to the questions presented by the petitioners, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether the State’s regulation of liquor advertising, as applied to out-of-state broadcast signals, is valid in light of existing federal regulation of cable broadcasting.


text:
    No. 82-1860.
    No. 82-1862.
    Schneider Moving & Storage Co. v. Robbins et al.; and Prosser’s Moving & Storage Co. v. Robbins et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari granted, cases consolidated, and a total of one hour allotted for oral argument. Reported below: 700 F. 2d 433.


text:
    No. 82-1988.
    Tower, Public Defender of Douglas County, Oregon, et al. v. Glover.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 82-1325.
    I.A.M. National Pension Fund v. Elser et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1450.
    In re Schulman.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1486.
    Chevron Chemical Co. v. Gilmore, Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1600.
    Gibbons, Trustee of the Property of Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co. v. National Steel Service Center, Inc.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1607.
    Bunkfeldt Broadcasting Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1635.
    Lanigan v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1636.
    Barnett et ux. v. Falvey et al.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1644.
    Swain v. Lehman, Secretary of the Navy.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1645.
    Julius Goldman’s Egg City v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1667.
    Leach v. United States Postal Service et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1670.
    Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana et al. v. Harry L. Laws Co., Inc., et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1676.
    Sovereign News Co. v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1685.
    Multistate Legal Studies, Inc. v. Ladd, Register of Copyrights, et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1687.
    Wuagneux v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1692.
    Argento et al. v. Lenard.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1698.
    Nevin et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1713.
    Frame et al. v. South Bend Community School Corp. et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1725.
    Massachusetts v. Gagnon et al.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1731.
    No. 82-1732.
    No. 82-1815.
    Herzfeld et al. v. United States District Court for the District of Colorado et al.; Brown et al. v. Parker et al.; and Eken et al. v. International Mining Exchange, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 699 F. 2d 503.


text:
    No. 82-1754.
    Maritime International Nominees Establishment v. Republic of Guinea et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1760.
    Health Care Plan of New Jersey, Inc. v. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1767.
    Hatteras, Inc. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1768.
    Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Getto.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1769.
    Lakewood, Ohio, Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, Inc. v. City of Lakewood, Ohio.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1781.
    Webster v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1785.
    Citadel Corp. v. Puerto Rico Highway Authority et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1788.
    Alabama Power Co. v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1799.
    Burke v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1805.
    Johnson County Memorial Hospital et al. v. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1806.
    Hawaiian Independent Refinery, Inc. v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1807.
    Shields v. United States et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1811.
    Desert Palace, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1812.
    Fortner v. Nebraska.
   Sup. Ct. Neb. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1814.
    City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida v. Farmer.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1817.
    Harlaux et al. v. Harlaux.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1820.
    No. 82-6699.
    Duerr v. Ohio; and Duerr v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Hamilton County. Certiorari denied. Reported below: No. 82-1820, 8 Ohio App. 3d 396, 457 N. E. 2d 834; No. 82-6699, 8 Ohio App. 3d 404, 457 N. E. 2d 843.


text:
    No. 82-1823.
    West Coast Media, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1824.
    Hirschfeld et al. v. Dreyer et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1825.
    Florida Tile Co., a Division of Sikes Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1826.
    Bond et al. v. General Motors Corp. et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1833.
    Santiago v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1842.
    Wright v. Defense Logistics Agency.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1843.
    Merena v. Sato, Building Inspector for the City and County of Honolulu, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1844.
    Central National Bank of Poteau, Oklahoma v. Coal Washer Rental Corp.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1846.
    Andrews v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1849.
    Leonard B. Hebert, Jr. & Co., Inc., et al. v. National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1851.
    Pendleton et al. v. United Parcel Service et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1854.
    Avitzur v. Avitzur.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1855.
    Interlox Punch & Die Corp. et al. v. Insilco Corp. et al.
   Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1858.
    Palmer v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1864.
    131.68 Acres of Land, More or Less Situated in St. James Parish, Louisiana, et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1867.
    Ben Kozloff, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Business Credit.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1869.
    No. 82-2098.
    Lewy et al. v. Weinberger et al.; and Coyne et al. v. Weinberger et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 698 F. 2d 61.


text:
    No. 82-1871.
    Texas v. Platoro Ltd., Inc.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1872.
    Messner v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1874.
    Deakyne v. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers of the United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1875.
    Carpet Seaming Tape Licensing Corp. v. Best Seam, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1880.
    Norris Industries, Inc. v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1881.
    Doe v. Executive Securities Corp., by MacRae, as Trustee.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1883.
    Fehlhaber, as Personal Representative of Fehlhaber v. Fehlhaber.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1884.
    Morales v. New York University et al.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1886.
    Berry v. Berger.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1892.
    Hayes Oilfield Construction Co., Inc. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1893.
    Clark, a Minor, by Clark, et al. v. Arizona Interscholastic Assn. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1894.
    Aldrich v. Kansas.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1897.
    First Catholic Slovak Ladies Assn. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1898.
    Kondrat v. Schaefer et al.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Lake County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1900.
    Siano v. Justices of Massachusetts et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1901.
    Siano v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. et al.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1903.
    O’Brien v. Wilcox & Schlosser Co., L.P.A.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Franklin County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1904.
    Watson et al. v. Bartlett et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1905.
    Sun Chemical Corp., Successor in Interest by Merger to Kollsman Instrument Corp. v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1906.
    Laclede Gas Co. v. Office of Public Counsel of Missouri et al.
   Ct. App. Mo., Western Dist. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1907.
    Mississippi Power Co. v. Mississippi Public Service Commission et al.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1908.
    Cardosa et al. v. Morales.
   Ct. App. Cal., 5th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1910.
    Anchor Motor Freight, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, Local Union No. 377, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1914.
    Falkowski v. Perry et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1915.
    California v. Harvier et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1917.
    Gary Aircraft Corp. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1918.
    Norman et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1919.
    Rowan Cos., Inc., et al. v. Marathon Pipeline Co. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1920.
    Alabama v. Gordon, Judge, Circuit Court of Montgomery (Eley, Real Party in Interest).
   Ct. Crim. App. Ala. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1921.
    Kaushiva v. Hotter.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1923.
    California v. Carroll.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1927.
    Florida v. Gragg.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1929.
    Eisenbeiss v. Jarrell et al.
   Ct. Sp. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1931.
    Mesirow et al. v. Pepperidge Farm, Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1932.
    Billups v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1935.
    Demyan’s Hofbrau, Inc. v. INA Underwriters Insurance Co.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1936.
    Rodriguez v. Flota Mercante Grancolombiana, S.A.,et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1939.
    Dixon v. Dixon.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1942.
    Hoffman v. South Carolina.
   Sup. Ct. S. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1943.
    Joseph Gann, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1945.
    Oceanic Contractors, Inc., et al. v. Cormier.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1948.
    Cantrell v. Rosa, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rosa, et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1949.
    Shaff v. United States et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1950.
    Church of Christ of Collinsville, Oklahoma, et al. v. Graham, Judge of the Fourteenth Judicial District of Oklahoma, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1952.
    Balk v. United States Information Agency.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1953.
    Pride v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1954.
    Abadi v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1956.
    Morningstar v. Florida.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1960.
    Brennan et al. v. City of Los Angeles.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1962.
    Steele v. Lamar.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1963.
    Herbert v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1964.
    Coniglio v. Warden, Clinton Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1965.
    Wynshaw v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1966.
    Simutis, Individually, and as Consul General of Republic of Lithuania at New York, New York v. Daniunas et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1967.
    Zirpolo v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1968.
    Arkla, Inc., Formerly Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. v. Hall et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1969.
    Klamath-Lake Pharmaceutical Assn. v. Klamath Medical Service Bureau et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1972.
    Hochanadel v. Detco Trailer, Inc., et al.
   Ct. App. Kan. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1973.
    Brister et al. v. Parish of Jefferson, Louisiana, et al.
   Ct. App. La., 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1978.
    Simpson v. Pennsylvania et al.
   Pa. Commw. Ct. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1979.
    Woodside v. Postmaster General of the United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1980.
    No. 82-1982.
    Smith v. Harmsen et al.; and Shannon et al. v. Harmsen et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 693 F. 2d 932.


text:
    No. 82-1981.
    Montemayor et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1985.
    Cosoff et al. v. Rodman, as Trustee of W. T. Grant Co., Bankrupt, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1987.
    Ferris v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1989.
    Brummer, Public Defender of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida, et al. v. Florida ex rel. Smith, Attorney General of Florida, et al.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1991.
    Schwarz v. Coastal Resources Management et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1992.
    Artic International, Inc. v. Midway Manufacturing Co.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1995.
    Nembhard et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1996.
    Chase Foundry & Manufacturing Co. v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Franklin County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-1999.
    Chavez v. Smith, Attorney General of Florida.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2000.
    Green v. Green et al.
   Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2001.
    Vander Jagt et al. v. O’Neill et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2002.
    H. J. Justin & Sons, Inc., dba Justin Boot Co. v. Deukmejian, Governor of California, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2004.
    Nibungco v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2009.
    Dill v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2010.
    Kuellmar et ux. v. Village of Brookfield.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2012.
    Ehlers v. City of Decatur, Georgia.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2014.
    South Park Independent School District v. United States et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2018.
    Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Malandris.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2020.
    Hovsepian, aka Hughes v. Neff, Independent Executor of the Estate of Lummis, et al.
   Ct. App. Tex., 14th Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2021.
    Marsh v. City of Oakland.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2022.
    Beil v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 2d Dist. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2023.
    Ashe v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2024.
    Early et al. v. Eastern Transfer et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2025.
    Teal v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., Inc.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2026.
    Weston v. Bachman et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2027.
    Schmidt v. Iowa et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2029.
    Fakier v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2031.
    Case et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2032.
    Nedeczky v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Greene County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2033.
    Associated Builders & Contractors, Northern California Chapter, et al. v. Carpenters Vacation & Holiday Trust Fund for Northern California et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2035.
    Jackson v. Handley et al.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Me. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2036.
    Bergman v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2037.
    Castano v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2038.
    Salsbury, as Parent, Natural Guardian, and Administrator of the Estate of Salsbury v. Erie County et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2039.
    O’Neill v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2041.
    Johnson v. Perez, Director, Social Services Agency, et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2043.
    Walsh v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2044.
    Western Food Equipment Co. v. Foss America, Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2045.
    Committee to Preserve American Color Television, aka COMPACT, et al. v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2046.
    United Transportation Union v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority et al.
   Sp. Ct. R. R. R. A. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2047.
    Latin Belly, Ltd., et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2048.
    Meeker v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2050.
    Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia v. Lincoln.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2052.
    Defex v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2055.
    Blanton v. South Carolina.
   Sup. Ct. S. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2057.
    Lesiak v. Ferguson, Auditor of the State of Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Cuyahoga County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2060.
    Fidelity Construction Co. v. United States.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2062.
    Chick Kam Choo, Individually, and as Administratrix of the Estate of Leong Chong, et al. v. Esso Oil Co. et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2063.
    Ahmed et al. v. American Steamship Owners Mutual Protection & Indemnity Assn., Inc., et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2064.
    Quality Ford, Inc., et al. v. Ford Motor Co. et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2065.
    Rust v. Ruvolo et al.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Lucas County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2066.
    SouthTrust Bank of Alabama, Birmingham v. VISA, U.S.A., Inc.
   C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2067.
    Galanty v. Chrysler Corp. et al.
   Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2068.
    Sutton v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2069.
    Cox v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2071.
    Drey et ux. v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Reported below: 705 F. 2d 965.


text:
    No. 82-2073.
    Demos v. Commercial Union Insurance Co., Inc.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2074.
    Charapata et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2076.
    Towner et al. v. Vanderbilt University et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2078.
    Hackford et al. v. First Security Bank of Utah, N.A.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2080.
    Hess v. South Carolina.
   Sup. Ct. S. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2081.
    Ocean Sands Holding Corp. et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2084.
    Phillippi et ux. v. Bechtel Associates Professional Corp., D.C., et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2085.
    Joint Council of Teamsters No. 42 et al. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2086.
    Director of the California State Department of Social Services v. Zapata et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2087.
    Brown v. City of Atlanta.
   Ct. App. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2089.
    Beausang et al. v. Mullen.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2090.
    Bissette v. South Carolina.
   Sup. Ct. S. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2093.
    Budde v. Kentron Hawaii, Ltd., et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2097.
    Luigi Marre Land & Cattle Co. v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2101.
    Camer et al. v. Eikenberry, Attorney General of Washington, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2102.
    Quality Packaging Supply Corp. et al. v. City of Rochester et al.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2103.
    Universal Restaurants, Inc. v. Fellows.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2104.
    Grace v. Western Contracting Corp.
   Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2106.
    Lampkin v. North American Finance Co.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2108.
    No. 82-2121.
    Porter v. United States; and Zang v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 703 F. 2d 1186.


text:
    No. 82-2109.
    PB v. United States et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2110.
    Best v. Eagerton et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2111.
    Shapiro v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2112.
    Ruiz v. Cristo Rey Community Center et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2114.
    Frans v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2118.
    Lask et al. v. United States et al.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2119.
    Fadell v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2122.
    Thompson et al. v. Nelson et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2123.
    Plachter et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2126.
    Marriott In-Flite Services, a Division of Marriott Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2127.
    Mertsching v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2131.
    Miles et al. v. New York State Teamsters Conference Pension and Retirement Fund Employee Pension Benefit Plan.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2133.
    Minch v. City of Fargo.
   Sup. Ct. N. D. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2135.
    Wagner v. Colorado.
   Ct. App. Colo. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2136.
    Frezzo Brothers, Inc., et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2137.
    JBL Enterprises, Inc., et al. v. Jhirmack Enterprises, Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2138.
    Wolfgram, Next Friend of Wolfgram, et al. v. Bombardier Ltd.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2141.
    Cheren v. Bechtel Inc. et al.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2142.
    Yee v. Yee et al.
   Sup. Ct. Haw. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2143.
    Burlington Northern Inc., Successor by Merger to St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. v. Bair.
   Sup. Ct. Mo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2144.
    Woodruff et ux. v. Angus, Next Friend of Angus, et al.
   Ct. App. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2145.
    Holton, Chief Investigator, Select Committee on Aging, U. S. House of Representatives, et al. v. Benford.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2150.
    Platt v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2152.
    St. James Hospital v. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2153.
    National Foundation for Cancer Research, Inc. v. Council of Better Business Bureaus, Inc.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2154.
    Montgomery Mall Limited Partnership v. General Electric Credit Corp.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2155.
    Escambia County, Florida, et al. v. McMillan et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari before judgment denied.


text:
    No. 82-2158.
    Warren v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2159.
    B. D. International Discount Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2160.
    Sparano v. Secretary of the Army et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2161.
    Hicks v. Apex Marine Corp.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2162.
    Safecard Services, Inc. v. Dow Jones & Co., Inc., et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-2165.
    Levine et al. v. Silsdorf.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6186.
    Dobson v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6255.
    Smith, aka El-Amin v. Government of the Virgin Islands.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6296.
    Moschiano v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6405.
    McMannis v. Mohn, Acting Superintendent, West Virginia Penitentiary.
   Sup. Ct. App. W. Va. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6413.
    Julian v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6428.
    Franklin v. Kroger Co.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6450.
    Harris v. Quinlan, Warden.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6485.
    Bonds v. Washington.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6500.
    Minick v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6538.
    Wright v. Griffin, Warden.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6542.
    Hampton v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6562.
    Lopez v. New Mexico.
   Ct. App. N. M. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6564.
    Smith v. Maggio, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6570.
    Knight v. Johnson et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6589.
    Cook v. United States Department of Labor.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6592.
    Smith v. Lockhart, Director, Arkansas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6600.
    Mollohan v. West Virginia.
   Sup. Ct. App. W. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6601.
    Matteson v. Oregon State Penitentiary, Corrections Division.
   Ct. App. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6604.
    Dorsey v. Maggio, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6610.
    Coleman v. McCarthy, Superintendent of the California Men’s Colony.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6619.
    David v. Attorney General of the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6621.
    Deavers v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6636.
    Powell v. U. S. Bureau of Prisons et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6637.
    No. 82-6790.
    Blyden v. Government of the Virgin Islands; and George v. Government of the Virgin Islands.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 699 F. 2d 121.


text:
    No. 82-6655.
    Ford v. Israel et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6672.
    Vance v. Bordenkircher, Warden, West Virginia State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6676.
    Hannan v. Secretary of the Army et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6678.
    Everett v. Beard.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6682.
    Hudson v. Brierton, Warden.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6683.
    Gregory v. Iowa.
   Sup. Ct. Iowa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6692.
    Borsari v. Federal Aviation Administration.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6701.
    Clementi v. Scully, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6709.
    Borrelli v. Ciccitto et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6712.
    Howard v. Paxson et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6714.
    Arango v. New York.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6716.
    Adamson v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6723.
    Latchis v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6727.
    Van Dyke v. Wisconsin.
   Ct. App. Wis. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6730.
    Curtis v. Heckel, Warden, Vandalia Correctional Center.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6731.
    Holleman v. Duckworth et al.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6734.
    Miller v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crina. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6735.
    Owens v. Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Offender Rehabilitation of Florida.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6736.
    Wright v. Associates Financial Services Company of Oregon, Inc.
   Ct. App. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6737.
    Knapp v. Wisconsin.
   Sup. Ct. Wis. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6738.
    Luera v. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Correction.
   Ct. Crina. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6739.
    Arellanes v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6742.
    Adkins v. Hopper, Warden.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6744.
    Prasad v. Wassaic Developmental Center et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6747.
    Gil v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6748.
    Harding v. Garrison, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6751.
    Spinney v. Massachusetts.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6754.
    Sumlin v. Engle et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6755.
    Palmer v. Mintzes, Warden.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6756.
    O’Dillon v. Zant, Warden.
   Super. Ct. Ga., Butts County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6757.
    Friedman v. Ohio Department of Health.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6759.
    Salinas et al. v. Brier, Police Chief of the City of Milwaukee.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6760.
    Rudolph v. Locke et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6761.
    Lee v. Department of Personnel of the City of New York et al.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6766.
    Paul v. Henderson, Superintendent of Auburn Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6767.
    Christenson v. Headley, Superintendent of Bedford Hills Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6770.
    Brown v. Marshall.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6772.
    Guy v. United States Postal Service et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6774.
    Brodnex v. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6776.
    Weaver v. Pennsylvania.
   Super. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6779.
    Henry v. Arkansas.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6781.
    Simmons v. United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6782.
    Vuksta v. Bethlehem Steel Corp. et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6784.
    Stokes v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6785.
    Ronan v. Briggs et al.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6786.
    Pittman v. Louisiana.
   Ct. App. La., 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6787.
    Gant v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6792.
    Ganci v. Scully, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6793.
    Hall v. Cuyler et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6801.
    Parker v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6803.
    Robinson v. Johnson et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6804.
    Wintrey v. Breed, t/a Breed & Associates, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6807.
    Jackson v. Maryland.
   Ct. App. Md. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6809.
    Rose v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6813.
    Brown v. Baliles et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6814.
    Dominique v. Greer, Warden.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6817.
    Mottola v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6819.
    Nell v. Dunham, Superintendent, Arthur Kill Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6820.
    Stokes v. United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6822.
    V. J. S. v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6824.
    Aillon v. Connecticut.
   Sup. Ct. Conn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6826.
    Forbes v. Waddington et al.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6828.
    McCarthy v. McCarthy, Superintendent, California Men’s Colony.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6829.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6881.
    Martinez v. Winans, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6833.
    Littleton v. Wolff, Warden, Nevada State Prison, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6835.
    Letendre v. Fugate, Judge, Lee County General District Court, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6836.
    Bice-Bey v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6837.
    Lacour et al. v. West et al.
   Ct. App. La., 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6838.
    Hale v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Hamilton County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6841.
    Harger v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6842.
    Huang v. Bernstein et al.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6843.
    King v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6844.
    Maratty v. Sowders, Warden.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6845.
    Varella v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6846.
    Schulz v. California.
   App. Dept., Super. Ct. Cal., County of San Diego. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6849.
    Reese v. Alabama.
   Ct. Crina. App. Ala. Cer-

tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6851.
    Bowles v. Farris et al.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6853.
    Presley v. Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Offender Rehabilitation of Florida.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6855.
    Bedortha v. Cupp, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary.
   Sup. Ct. Ore. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6856.
    Donaldson v. United States.
   Ct. App.

D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6860.
    Boyd v. Shawnee Mission Public Schools, Unified School District No. 512, Johnson County, Kansas.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6864.
    O’Kelley v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6866.
    Toneman v. Burkhart.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6867.
    Trapnell v. O’Brien, Warden.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6868.
    Johnson v. Parks, Warden, Kentucky State Penitentiary, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6869.
    Black v. Barany et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6871.
    Anderson v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6872.
    Bridges v. Texas.
   Ct. App. Tex., 12th Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6873.
    Lee v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6874.
    Harshman et al. v. Petrolite Corp.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6877.
    Ferola v. Moran.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6879.
    Johnson v. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6880.
    King v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6882.
    Thomas v. United Steelworkers of America, Local 3754, AFL-CIO.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6884.
    Long v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6885.
    Freed v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6886.
    Illsley v. United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6888.
    Kaplan v. Office of the U. S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6891.
    Howard v. Taylor et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6892.
    Veteto v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6893.
    Reed v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6894.
    James v. Martin, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6895.
    Goodman, by Goodman, her Father and Next Friend v. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6896.
    Lymon v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6897.
    Holcomb v. California et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6898.
    Williams v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6899.
    Robinson v. Dawson, Judge, U. S. Tax Court.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6904.
    Johnson v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6905.
    Hamb v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6908.
    Callahan v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6911.
    No. 82-6925.
    No. 82-6941.
    Logarusic v. United States; Bagaric v. United States; and Sudar v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied. Reported below: 706 F. 2d 42.


text:
    No. 82-6914.
    Harvey v. Anderson et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6917.
    Hawkins v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6918.
    Wise v. Smyser, United States Magistrate.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6921.
    Maschi v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6924.
    Ingraham v. McCarthy et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6926.
    Dowdy v. Ohio.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6927.
    Garcia v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6928.
    Dodson v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6929.
    Fears v. United States.
   Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6930.
    Randall v. Posner et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6931.
    McClure v. Texas.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6932.
    Meador v. Ohio.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Summit County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6934.
    Ramon-Perez v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6936.
    Vanda v. Illinois.
   App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6938.
    Spotville v. Maggio, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6940.
    Whalen v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6943.
    Engel v. New York State Human Rights Appeal Board et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6944.
    Engel v. New York State Human Rights Appeal Board et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6947.
    Bothman v. Engle.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6948.
    Estrada-Ramirez v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6949.
    Viccarone v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir.

Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6951.
    O’Connell v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6952.
    Sanders v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6953.
    Sparks v. United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6954.
    Billings v. Pannucci, Circuit Judge, Muskegon County, Michigan, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6955.
    Jones v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6958.
    Randall v. Bailey et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6959.
    Walker v. Maggio, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6961.
    McMinn v. Marshall; and McMinn v. Seiter.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6962.
    Batch v. Bettis, Judge, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6963.
    Hicks v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6964.
    Starling v. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6965.
    Muhammad v. United States et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6966.
    Wong v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6967.
    Thomas v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6968.
    McLaughlin v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6970.
    Van Bens v. United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6971.
    Hartford v. Arizona.
   Sup. Ct. Ariz. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6972.
    Bartley v. New Jersey.
   Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6974.
    Whiteside v. Parke, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6976.
    Fluellen v. Jago.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6977.
    Gamez-Rubio v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6980.
    Lewis et al. v. Davis et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6984.
    Bell v. Thigpen, Commissioner, Mississippi Department of Corrections, et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6985.
    DeAndrea v. Florida.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6987.
    Baird v. Washington State Department of Social and Health Services.
   Ct. App. Wash. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6988.
    Love v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6993.
    Miller v. California.
   App. Dept., Super. Ct. Cal., County of Los Angeles. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6994.
    Faulkner v. Kelly, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6995.
    Reid v. Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
   Ct. Sp. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6996.
    McCrary-El v. Wyrick.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-6998.
    Laski v. Laski.
   Sup. Ct. N. J. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7000.
    Harbin v. Georgia.
   Ct. App. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7001.
    Jiles v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7007.
    Pawlyshyn v. Smith, Superintendent, Attica Correctional Facility.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7008.
    Harris et al. v. Kastama et al.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7009.
    Soto-Duran v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7010.
    Hernandez v. Estelle, Director, Texas Department of Corrections.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7011.
    Daniels v. Oklahoma.
   Ct. Crim. App. Okla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7012.
    Sanchez v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7016.
    Ryan v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7017.
    Forbes et al. v. Municipal Court of Los Angeles Judicial District et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7018.
    Murph v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7020.
    Baker v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7021.
    McKibbins v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7022.
    Mulville v. Iowa.
   Sup. Ct. Iowa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7023.
    Tokar et al. v. Hearne et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7024.
    Tinnen v. United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7025.
    Privett v. United States.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7026.
    Dobbs et ux. v. Cobb E.N.T. Associates, P.C., et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7028.
    Franklin v. United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7031.
    Roberts v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7032.
    Newtop v. Lee.
   Super. Ct. Cal., City and County of San Francisco. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7033.
    Panter et al. v. Miller et al.
   Ct. App. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7034.
    Edwards v. Parke, Warden, Kentucky State Penitentiary.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 82-7035.
    Caran v. United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-2.
    Leventhal v. Reiser et al.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-5.
    Polskie Linie Lotnicze (LOT Polish Airlines) v. Robles et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-7.
    King et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-8.
    Lee v. National Can Corp.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-10.
    Pressroom Unions-Printers League Income Security Fund v. Continental Assurance Co. et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-11.
    Jimena v. Board of Review of the Utah Industrial Commission et al.
   Sup. Ct. Utah. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-12.
    Bergen v. Edenfield, Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.
   C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-13.
    Fleury et al. v. Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc., et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 88-14.
    State Board of Equalization v. Trailer Train Co. et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-15.
    Salsbury, as Parent, Natural Guardian, and Administrator of the Estate of Salsbury v. Saint Vincent Hospital et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-16.
    Copenhaver v. Harris Enterprises, Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-17.
    Raja et vir v. Michael Reese Hospital et al.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-20.
    Powell v. Nigro et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-23.
    Iredell Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-25.
    Coody et al. v. Louisiana.
   Ct. App. La., 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-26.
    Laventhall v. General Dynamics Corp.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-31.
    Fair Grounds Corp. v. Pari-Mutuel Clerks Union of Louisiana, Local 328, Affiliated with the Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-33.
    Schwanecke et al. v. Harris County Hospital District et al.
   Ct. App. Tex., 10th Sup. Jud. Dist. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-34.
    Stouffer Corp. v. Prudential Insurance Company of America et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-36.
    Vann et al. v. United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-37.
    Damico v. United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-38.
    Santa Clara Valley Water District et al. v. Martino et ux.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-39.
    T.N.T. Marine Service, Inc. v. Weaver Shipyards & Drydocks, Inc.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-40.
    Hedley et al. v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-41.
    Local Union No. 141, Sheet Metal Workers International Assn., et al. v. Sandman et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-42.
    Hagerstown Kitchens, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners of Washington County et al.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-44.
    Solon Baptist Temple, Inc. v. City of Solon et al.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Cuyahoga County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-45.
    Carnicle v. Fox, Sheriff of Morris County.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-46.
    Kizzier Chevrolet Co., Inc., of Scottsbluff, Nebraska, et al. v. General Motors Corp., Oldsmobile Division.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-47.
    DiCarlo v. A & W Products Co., Inc., et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-49.
    Frank v. Davis, Commissioner of Parks and Recreation of New York City, et al.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 83-51.
    Bonded Elevator, Inc., et al. v. First American National Bank of Nashville.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 83-52.
    Taylor et ux. v. Lawson Milk Co. et al.
   Ct. App. Ohio, Franklin County. Certiorari denied.