Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (decided January 24, 1881): upholding federal income tax because it was not a “direct tax” such as has to be apportioned among the states by population (as is required by art. I, §2) (a later contrary decision led to the Sixteenth Amendment)
Panama Ry. Co. v. Pigott, 254 U.S. 552 (decided January 24, 1921): affirming Canal Zone District Court verdict for 7-year-old boy who was “run over” by a train (and still lived?); interesting because Holmes mentions that there was conflicting “testimony” from attorneys as to the law of Panama and judge had left that question of law for the jury (I once had a case transferred to Montreal and the Canadian attorneys told me that in that system “experts on the law” are allowed to testify — maybe it’s relevant that Quebec, like Panama, has a civil law and not a common law tradition)
National Organization for Women v. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249 (decided January 24, 1994): RICO claim brought by abortion clinics against “pro-life” organizations can go forward because no economic motivation need be alleged (after years of litigation NOW finally lost)
Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (decided January 24, 2005): appearance of second officer with cocaine-sniffing dog during traffic stop did not infringe Fourth Amendment where stop was not extended beyond the time it would ordinarily take to write the traffic ticket (first officer must have been a really slow writer)
Comm’r of Internal Revenue v. Banks, 543 U.S. 426 (decided January 24, 2005): if your recovery is taxable income (this was an employment discrimination suit), you have to pay tax even on that part that goes to the attorney (but the attorney pays on that amount also — isn’t that taxing the same income twice?)
留言