DOCSLIB.ORG

1961 Journal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

I OCTOBER TERM, 1961 STATISTICS Original Appellate Miscella- Total neous Number of cases on dockets 13 1, 062 1, 510 2, 585 Cases disposed of 0 860 1, 297 2, 157 Remaining on dockets 13 202 213 428 Cases disposed of—Appellate Docket: By written opinions 100 By per curiam opinions or orders 95 By motion to dismiss or per stipulation (merits cases) 0 By denial or dismissal of petitions for certiorari 665 Cases disposed of—Miscellaneous Docket: By written opinions 0 By denial or dismissal of petitions for certiorari 1, 093 By denial or withdrawal of other applications 120 By granting of " other applications" 1 By per curiam dismissal of appeals 44 By other per curiam opinions or orders 24 By transfer to Appellate Docket 15 Number of written opinions 85 Number of printed per curiam opinions 17 Number of petitions for certiorari granted 141 Number of appeals in which jurisdiction was noted or post- poned 38 Number of admissions to bar 1, 983 REFERENCE INDEX Page Court convened October 2, 1961 and adjourned June 25, 1962. Court announced change in hours of sessions meeting there- after from 10 a.m. to noon with luncheon recess from 12 noon to 12:30 p.m. and adjournment at 2:30 p.rn 1 Court met for first time at 10 a.m. under amended rule (Octo- ber 9, 1961) 4 IT Page Black, J., Remarks by Solicitor General and response by Chief Justice on occasion of completion of 25 full terms as Associ- ate Justice (June 25, 1962) 328 Whittaker, J., Announcement of retirement (April 1, 1962) and correspondence thereon (April 2, 1962) 226 White, J., Commission read and oaths taken (April 16, 1962) (President Kennedy attended ceremony) 245 Reed, J., Designated and assigned to U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 2 Designated and assigned to U.S. Court of Claims 2 Burton, J., Designated and assigned to U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 2 Samuel Rayburn, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chief Justice announced death and Court adjourned out of respect 99 Allotment orders 235, 254 John F. Davis appointed Clerk (October 23, 1961) 72 Edmund P. Cullinan appointed Chief Deputy Clerk (December 11, 1961) 124 Rodolph deB. Waggaman appointed Deputy Clerk (February 19, 1962) 181 Clerk's bond approved 83 RULES: Rule 4(1) fixing hours of sessions, amended 2 APPEALS: Dismissed for want of a substantial federal question by per curiam opinion after argument (30) 73 Appeal from District Court dismissed. Papers treated as petition for certiorari and certiorari granted (84) 219 Case certified to this Court under 18 U.S.C. 3731, by Court of Appeals. (No Jurisdictional Statement filed.) Motion to remand denied and probable jurisdiction noted (735) 231 Jurisdiction postponed and counsel requested to brief and argue, in addition to merits, question of Court's juris- diction on direct appeal (794) 293 Motion of appellee to dismiss under Rule 14(2) granted and appeal dismissed (No. — Homestead Hospital v. Bobcik) 302 ARGUMENTS: Pro hac vice (2-3, 158) 128, 182 Postponement sua sponte (5-43) 7 Postponement granted on motion (142) 239 Ill ARGUMENTS—Continued Pag. Advancement denied on motions (257-583, 959, 799, 1037) 165,323,336 Amicus curiae: By special leave of Court (61, 6, 66, 87, 42, 2-3, 242) _ 8, 44, 52, 68, 128, 158 By consent of counsel (15, 282, 604) 50, 182, 269 Motion for leave to argue as amicus curiae denied (532) __ 206 Reargument set (20, 19, 44, 70, 76, 90, 91, 173, 255, 256, 264, 278, 8 Orig., 479, 476, 477) 230, 231, 310, 336 Cases on regular calendar placed on summary calendar when companion cases were granted (21, 469, 366, 606) _ 10, 316, 337 Removed from summary calendar on motion (74) 68 Time allotted (2-3) 68 Joint request for allotment and division of time for argu- ment approved (8 Orig.) 75 Portion of case set for reargument, other portion decided by opinion (20) 230 No appearance or brief for respondents (37) 98 Submitted on brief without argument by one party where other parties argued (61) 126 Briefs accelerated and cases set for early hearing on motion (2-3) 75 Argument commenced by party other than plaintiff below in " cross-petition cases" by agreement of counsel (36-55) _ 83 Motions of two appellees in one case that separate hear- ings be held, granted (439) 147 Sixteen hours allowed for original argument and six hours allowed on reargument (8 Orig.) 75, 310 Counsel directed to argue, in addition to merits, question of Court's jurisdiction on direct appeal (239) 147 Arguments held on Monday and Tuesday (April 2 and 3) and again on Monday and Tuesday (April 9 and 10) resulting in a total of 5 weeks of argument during a six week period. ATTORNEYS: Appearances withdrawn on motion (10, 46, 26, 27, 28, 32, 85, 86, 248, 71, 84, 315, 244, 394, 867 Misc.) 7, 68, 76, 119, 206, 353 Counsel appointed on motion (1011) 336 Counsel appointed sua sponte (158, 479) 8, 158 Motion for appointment of counsel denied (476) 91 IV ATTORNEYS—Continued Palfe Disbarment (Lowell M. Birrell), following suspension and show cause order, resignation was submitted and ac- cepted by Court (740 Misc.) 101, 166 Disbarment (Jules Chopak) suspension and show cause order issued (1273 Misc.) 249 Resignation accepted (Henry R. Shields) (No. —, In the Matter of Henry R. Shields) 310 BRIEFS: Motion of Governor of State for leave to file amicus curiae brief, granted (6) 7 Merits briefs accelerated on motion (2-3) 75 Motion (appeal) for acceleration of filing motions denied (643) ..1 147 Separate briefs ordered filed on motion by separate appellees in same case (439) 147 Solicitor General invited to file briefs expressing views of the United States (659, 89) 206, 219 Motion to strike respondent's brief denied (1038 Misc.)__ 354 Amicus curiae briefs. Court granted approximately 33 motions and denied approximately 4 such motions. CERTIORARI: Limited grant and denied "in all other respects" (242) 11 Limited grant with directions to brief and argue jurisdic- tion (839) 294 Consideration deferred to accord petitioner opportunity to secure certificate from State Supreme Court as to basis of opinion below (80) 89 Dismissed as improvidently granted (58, 234, 288, 396) __ 106, 204, 230, 321 Dismissed as to deceased respondent (in opinion) (101) 273 "Denial", meaning of, Memo of two Justices (864 Misc.)_ 201 Denied in light of representations by State Attorney General as to adequacy of state remedies (21 Misc., 709 Misc.) 38, 353 Denied in light of representations by State Attorney General that State Court would consider and pass upon a proper petition for furnishing a record without pre- payment of costs (880 Misc.) 353 Denied without prejudice to pending habeas corpus pro- ceedings in USDC (494 Misc.) 82 V CERTIORARI—Continued Paffe Denied without prejudice to future certiorari proceedings to review further actions of courts below on petitioner's application to appeal his conviction in forma pauperis as suggested by Solicitor General (125 Misc.) 151 Denied when court not in session in capital cases in view of imminent death sentences (629 Misc., 1084 Misc., 853) 65, 193,244 Denied in per curiam opinion (584 Misc.) 281 Before judgment. Appeal from USDC dismissed and papers treated as petition for certiorari before judgment and granted (84) 219 Petition directed to two courts denied (660) 219 COSTS AND DAMAGES: Motion for damages denied (289) 23 EXTRAORDINARY WRITS: Habeas corpus—Motion for leave to file in federal case denied but papers treated as petition for certiorari to USCA and granted (1073 Misc.) 187 Habeas corpus—Motion for leave to file petition trans- ferred to USDC pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241(b) and Rule 31(5) Revised Rules (602 Misc.) 288 Habeas corpus—Motion for leave to file denied but papers treated as petition for certiorari. Certiorari granted and case transferred to USDC (928 Misc.) 354 Injunction—Motion for issuance to stay state criminal proceedings denied for want of standing and other considerations (No. Bailey v. Patterson) 131 — , Mandamus—Motion for leave to file granted and case argued and decided with ancillary certiorari proceeding. In view of opinion, no further action was required on the mandamus feature (180 Misc.) 10, 332 JUDGMENTS, OPINIONS AND MANDATES: Judgments: Affirmed by equally divided Court (124) 309 Affirmed as to Counts I and III and reversed as to Count II with remand to USDC (430-434) 320 Announced (46, 123, 242, 481) 279,330 Motion to recall and amend or correct denied (47) 199 Order of USDC dismissing complaint modified to pro- vide that proceedings are remanded to ICC with directions to vacate and set aside its order (41) 130 657008—62 2 VI JUDGMENTS, OPINIONS AND MANDATES—Continued Judgments—Continued p»*e Reversed (State) on confession of error and examina- tion of record (66 Misc.) 6 Reversed (CA) with remand to that Court with direc- tions to enter judgment affirming and enforcing order of NLRB (37) 130 Reversed (CA) with directions that judgment be en- tered affirming and enforcing order of NLRB (35, 38, 39) 146 Reversed (CA) with instructions to enforce order of NLRB (222) 292 Reversed (CA) with directions that judgment be en- tered enforcing the order of NLRB in its entirety (464) 301 Reversed (CA) with remand to USDC with instruc- tions to dismiss indictment (75) 130 Reversed (CA) with instructions to affirm order of FTC (74) 145 Reversed (CA) with remand of case to separate USDC's wherein they arose (83) 199 Reversed (CA) with remand to that Court for further proceedings including resolution of any questions CA might have left unanswered on assumption that there was no liability
Recommended publications
  • Volume 59, Issue 1

    Volume 59, Issue 1

    Volume 60, Issue 4 Page 1023 Stanford Law Review THE SURPRISINGLY STRONGER CASE FOR THE LEGALITY OF THE NSA SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM: THE FDR PRECEDENT Neal Katyal & Richard Caplan © 2008 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, from the Stanford Law Review at 60 STAN. L. REV. 1023 (2008). For information visit http://lawreview.stanford.edu. THE SURPRISINGLY STRONGER CASE FOR THE LEGALITY OF THE NSA SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM: THE FDR PRECEDENT Neal Katyal* and Richard Caplan** INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................1024 I. THE NSA CONTROVERSY .................................................................................1029 A. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act................................................1029 B. The NSA Program .....................................................................................1032 II. THE PRECURSOR TO THE FDR PRECEDENT: NARDONE I AND II........................1035 A. The 1934 Communications Act .................................................................1035 B. FDR’s Thirst for Intelligence ....................................................................1037 C. Nardone I...................................................................................................1041 D. Nardone II .................................................................................................1045 III. FDR’S DEFIANCE OF CONGRESS AND THE SUPREME COURT..........................1047 A. Attorney General
  • LEIPZIGER Amtsblatt Vom 29.10.2016, Ausgabe 19/2014

    LEIPZIGER Amtsblatt Vom 29.10.2016, Ausgabe 19/2014

    29. Oktober 2016 Nummer 19 26. Jahrgang Heimat und Fremde Rückschau und Ausblick Aktiv und entschlossen „euro scene“ spielt vom Die Großwohnsiedlung Seniorenbeirat liefert seit 8. bis 13. November Schönefeld wird 40 – Bilanz 25 Jahren wichtige Impulse Geschichten vom Zuhausesein einer Stadtteilentwicklung für Lebensqualität im Alter Seite 2 Seite 3 Seite 6 Gedenken an die Dokfi lm startet mit einhundert Premieren Pogromnacht „Ungehorsam“ – unter diesem Motto laufen 309 Animations- und Dokumentarfi lme vom 31. Oktober bis 6. November in Leipzig Ein Zeichen gegen antijüdische Politik Volles Programm: Vom sehen sind. Der Länderfo- wollte er setzen: der 17-jährige Jude 31. Oktober bis zum 6. kus Türkei vereint politisch Herschel Grynspan, der am 7. November November können sich aktuelle Dokumentar- und 1938 in der deutschen Botschaft in Paris die interessierten Leipzi- Animationsfi lme, die den den Diplomaten Ernst von Rath nieder- gerinnen und Leipziger offi ziellen Bildern der Regie- schoss. Dieses Attentat war lang ersehnter wieder fast rund um die Uhr rung unabhängige Filme Vorwand der Nationalsozialisten für Filmproduktionen aus aller entgegenstellen wollen. die Reichspogromnacht vom 9. auf den Welt anschauen. 309 Ani- In der Retrospektive 10. November und den Auftakt für eine mations- und Dokumentar- dreht sich alles um den pol- öffentliche und sich brutal verstärkende fi lme stehen auf dem prall nischen Dok-Film, und das Verfolgung der Juden. gefüllten Programm des 59. Jugendprogramm bekennt Leipzig erinnert an die Opfer und Internationalen Leipziger „We are HipHop“. Im Son- lädt am 9. November, 18.30 Uhr, an Festivals für Dokumentar- derprogramm „Der andere die Gedenkstätte Gottschedstraße zur und Animationsfi lm (DOK Blick? Alltag in der DDR“ Kranzniederlegung und Schweigeminute Leipzig).
  • Mitteilungsblatt Brunnenregion 2017 KW17

    Mitteilungsblatt Brunnenregion 2017 KW17

    17 28. APRIL 2017 Kleintierzuchtverein C 425 Epfenbach e.V. Kleintierzuchtverein C 425 Epfenbach e.V. Kleintierzuchtverein C 425 Epfenbach e.V. lädt herzlich ein lädt herzlich ein zum Gockelfest am lädt herzlich ein 1.lädt Mai herzlich 2017ein am von 10:30 Uhr bis 18:00 Uhr zum Gockelfest Gockelfest am am in der Züchterhalle Waldstraße 16, in Epfenbach zum am Für das leibliche1. Wohl Mai istGockelfest gesorgt 2017 und zusätzlich gibt es Nachmittags Kaffee und Kuchen von 10:30 Uhr bis 18:00 Uhr 1. Mai1. Mai 2017 2017 in vonder Züchterhalle 10:30von WaldstraßeUhr 10:30 bis Uhr 18:0016, bis in Epfenbach18:00 Uhr Uhr in der Züchterhalle Waldstraße 16, in Epfenbach Für das leibliche Wohl ist gesorgt und zusätzlich gibt es Nachmittags Kaffee und Kuchen Für das leibliche Wohl ist gesorgt und zusätzlich gibt es nachmittags Kaffee und Kuchen. S. 12 Saisonauftakt am 30. April Maibaumfest auf dem Marktplatz in Waibstadt Wir begrüßen Sie auch 2017 herzlich auf der Sonntag, 30. April 2017, ab 17.30 Uhr Veranstalter Turnverein 1865 Waibstadt e.V. Strecke S. 43 Fahrpläne auf den Rathäusern oder unter www.Krebsbachtal-bahn.de S. 45 Amtsblatt des Gemeindeverwaltungsverbandes Waibstadt · 28. April 2017 · Nr. 17  | 2 Bereitschaftsdienste Veranstaltungskalender Rettungsdienst 112 Allgemeiner Notfalldienst bundesweite Rufnummer 116 117 GRN-Klinik Sinsheim, Alte Waibstadter Straße 2, 74889 Sinsheim Epfenbach Mo., Di., Do., 19.00 - Folgetag 7.00 Uhr, Mi., 13.00 - Do., 7.00 Uhr, Fr., 19.00 bis Mo., 7.00 Uhr durchgehend Feiertage von 19.00 Uhr des Vortages bis 7.00 Uhr des Folgetages 28.04.
  • Executive Summary 111111.25 '"111.4 II

    Executive Summary 111111.25 '"111.4 II

    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. "r,'"_" , -" .~,- ~ 7 '~~ :;-~ ~-.. ,j National Criminal Justice Reference Service i ---------------~~--------------------------------------------~ r , ,i Prepared for the­ ""I I , Mississippi Judicial Council "f nCJrs This microfiche was produced frQm documents received for inclusion in the NCJRS data base. Since NCJRS cannot exercise control over the physical condition of the documents submitted, fjl, the individual frame quality will vary. The resolution chart on Th~ Mississippi Court Finance Study this frame may be used to evaluate the document quality. I , I Executive Summary 111111.25 '"111.4 II MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART NATIONAL BUREAU Of STANDARDS-196;>-A Microfilming procedures used to create this fiche comply with i I the standards set forth in 41CFR 101-11.504. i Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the author(s) and do not represent the official I position or policies of the U. S. Department of Justice. I \----J Date Filmed Ernest H. Short March, 1980 National Institute of ,Justice I &Associates, Inc. United States Department of Justice 2/12/81 I Washington, 'D. C. 20531 I l i iii Ii 7r o PREFACE The Mississippi Courts Finance Study was conducted by Ernest H. Short & Associates, Inc. under contract with the Mississippi JUdicial Council I with support of funds from the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration of the U.S. Department of Justice. The points of view and opinions in the report series are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position THE MISSISSIPPI COURTS FINANCE STUDY or policies of the Mississippi Judicial Councilor the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration.
  • Black Women, Educational Philosophies, and Community Service, 1865-1965/ Stephanie Y

    Black Women, Educational Philosophies, and Community Service, 1865-1965/ Stephanie Y

    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-2003 Living legacies : Black women, educational philosophies, and community service, 1865-1965/ Stephanie Y. Evans University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation Evans, Stephanie Y., "Living legacies : Black women, educational philosophies, and community service, 1865-1965/" (2003). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 915. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/915 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. M UMASS. DATE DUE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST LIVING LEGACIES: BLACK WOMEN, EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHIES, AND COMMUNITY SERVICE, 1865-1965 A Dissertation Presented by STEPHANIE YVETTE EVANS Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2003 Afro-American Studies © Copyright by Stephanie Yvette Evans 2003 All Rights Reserved BLACK WOMEN, EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOHIES, AND COMMUNITY SERVICE, 1865-1964 A Dissertation Presented by STEPHANIE YVETTE EVANS Approved as to style and content by: Jo Bracey Jr., Chair William Strickland,
  • Jurisdiction to Pronounce Null a Marriage Celebrated in Another State Or Foreign Country 1 T HE Supreme Court of California in Mayer V

    Jurisdiction to Pronounce Null a Marriage Celebrated in Another State Or Foreign Country 1 T HE Supreme Court of California in Mayer V

    California Law Review Volume XVIII JANUARY, 1930 Number 2 Jurisdiction to Pronounce Null a Marriage Celebrated in Another State or Foreign Country 1 T HE Supreme Court of California in Mayer v. Mayer has given utterance to a dictum that deserves more than passing mention. It is as follows: "Since the validity of marriage is generally deter- mined by the law of the state where the marriage took place, there are cogent reasons why annulment should be sought in the tribunals of that state." It is the latter part of the statement that we believe merits attention. If the learned Justice in the Mayer case means that a court of the state or country where the marriage was celebrated may set it aside, provided both parties are properly before that court, one may not be tempted to quarrel with his statement, but if he means to give support to the opinion that it should have exclusive jurisdiction to annul such marriages irrespective of the residence or domicile of the parties to the suit, he lends some approval to a highly questionable proposition. Unfortunately that proposition has been championed by a few American writers of great learning and ability, and has been ten- tatively adopted by the American Law Institute in its Restatement of Conflict of Laws.2 It is, we believe, a doctrine that, notwithstanding its distinguished defenders, is without substantial support in adjudicated cases; that rests on no solid reason in theory or convenience; and that is calculated, if it should be given credence, to effect much practical injustice.
  • State Court Caseload Statistics: Annual Report 1988 Xi FIGURE D: Criminal Case Unit of Count Used by the State Trial Courts

    State Court Caseload Statistics: Annual Report 1988 Xi FIGURE D: Criminal Case Unit of Count Used by the State Trial Courts

    AJIIL State court T caseload statistics: Annual Report 1988 Wyoming Conference of State Court Administrators Alabama Alaska Arizl :alifornia Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida laho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Mary1 Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevad; ew Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohia C 'ennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota ' tah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming ourt Administrators Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Coll elaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois In Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Mint lissouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New orth Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Pui ;land South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Conference of State Court Administratc Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District1 1 NCSC 1 KF i A joint effort of the Conference of State Court Administrators i 180 , .c74 I and the National Center for State Courts : 1988 I c. 2 I bu .CT q IC1 bS glib state court c ,a-- T caseload statistics: Annual Report, 1988 Funding Provided by the STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE Grant Number SJI 88-07X-067 ~pdcJ-3-clO A joint effort of the Conference of State Court Administrators, State Justice Institute, and the National Center for State Courts’ Court Statistics Project February 1990 Library National Center for State Courts 300 Newport Av~. WilIiarnsburg, VA 231 87-8798 Copyright@by The National Center for State Courts ISBN 0-89656-097-X National Center Publication No. R-115 This report was developed under Grant SJI-88-07X-067 from the State Justice Institute.
  • Honorary Degree Recipients 1977 – Present

    Honorary Degree Recipients 1977 – Present

    Board of Trustees HONORARY DEGREE RECIPIENTS 1977 – PRESENT Name Year Awarded Name Year Awarded Claire Collins Harvey, C‘37 Harry Belafonte 1977 Patricia Roberts Harris Katherine Dunham 1990 Toni Morrison 1978 Nelson Mandela Marian Anderson Marguerite Ross Barnett Ruby Dee Mattiwilda Dobbs, C‘46 1979 1991 Constance Baker Motley Miriam Makeba Sarah Sage McAlpin Audrey Forbes Manley, C‘55 Mary French Rockefeller 1980 Jesse Norman 1992 Mabel Murphy Smythe* Louis Rawls 1993 Cardiss Collins Oprah Winfrey Effie O’Neal Ellis, C‘33 Margaret Walker Alexander Dorothy I. Height 1981 Oran W. Eagleson Albert E. Manley Carol Moseley Braun 1994 Mary Brookins Ross, C‘28 Donna Shalala Shirley Chisholm Susan Taylor Eleanor Holmes Norton 1982 Elizabeth Catlett James Robinson Alice Walker* 1995 Maya Angelou Elie Wiesel Etta Moten Barnett Rita Dove Anne Cox Chambers 1983 Myrlie Evers-Williams Grace L. Hewell, C‘40 Damon Keith 1996 Sam Nunn Pinkie Gordon Lane, C‘49 Clara Stanton Jones, C‘34 Levi Watkins, Jr. Coretta Scott King Patricia Roberts Harris 1984 Jeanne Spurlock* Claire Collins Harvey, C’37 1997 Cicely Tyson Bernice Johnson Reagan, C‘70 Mary Hatwood Futrell Margaret Taylor Burroughs Charles Merrill Jewel Plummer Cobb 1985 Romae Turner Powell, C‘47 Ruth Davis, C‘66 Maxine Waters Lani Guinier 1998 Gwendolyn Brooks Alexine Clement Jackson, C‘56 William H. Cosby 1986 Jackie Joyner Kersee Faye Wattleton Louis Stokes Lena Horne Aurelia E. Brazeal, C‘65 Jacob Lawrence Johnnetta Betsch Cole 1987 Leontyne Price Dorothy Cotton Earl Graves Donald M. Stewart 1999 Selma Burke Marcelite Jordan Harris, C‘64 1988 Pearl Primus Lee Lorch Dame Ruth Nita Barrow Jewel Limar Prestage 1989 Camille Hanks Cosby Deborah Prothrow-Stith, C‘75 * Former Student As of November 2019 Board of Trustees HONORARY DEGREE RECIPIENTS 1977 – PRESENT Name Year Awarded Name Year Awarded Max Cleland Herschelle Sullivan Challenor, C’61 Maxine D.
  • Selected Highlights of Women's History

    Selected Highlights of Women's History

    Selected Highlights of Women’s History United States & Connecticut 1773 to 2015 The Permanent Commission on the Status of Women omen have made many contributions, large and Wsmall, to the history of our state and our nation. Although their accomplishments are too often left un- recorded, women deserve to take their rightful place in the annals of achievement in politics, science and inven- Our tion, medicine, the armed forces, the arts, athletics, and h philanthropy. 40t While this is by no means a complete history, this book attempts to remedy the obscurity to which too many Year women have been relegated. It presents highlights of Connecticut women’s achievements since 1773, and in- cludes entries from notable moments in women’s history nationally. With this edition, as the PCSW celebrates the 40th anniversary of its founding in 1973, we invite you to explore the many ways women have shaped, and continue to shape, our state. Edited and designed by Christine Palm, Communications Director This project was originally created under the direction of Barbara Potopowitz with assistance from Christa Allard. It was updated on the following dates by PCSW’s interns: January, 2003 by Melissa Griswold, Salem College February, 2004 by Nicole Graf, University of Connecticut February, 2005 by Sarah Hoyle, Trinity College November, 2005 by Elizabeth Silverio, St. Joseph’s College July, 2006 by Allison Bloom, Vassar College August, 2007 by Michelle Hodge, Smith College January, 2013 by Andrea Sanders, University of Connecticut Information contained in this book was culled from many sources, including (but not limited to): The Connecticut Women’s Hall of Fame, the U.S.
  • Chapman Law Review

    Chapman Law Review

    Chapman Law Review Volume 21 Board of Editors 2017–2018 Executive Board Editor-in-Chief LAUREN K. FITZPATRICK Managing Editor RYAN W. COOPER Senior Articles Editors Production Editor SUNEETA H. ISRANI MARISSA N. HAMILTON TAYLOR A. KENDZIERSKI CLARE M. WERNET Senior Notes & Comments Editor TAYLOR B. BROWN Senior Symposium Editor CINDY PARK Senior Submissions & Online Editor ALBERTO WILCHES –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Articles Editors ASHLEY C. ANDERSON KRISTEN N. KOVACICH ARLENE GALARZA STEVEN L. RIMMER NATALIE M. GAONA AMANDA M. SHAUGHNESSY-FORD ANAM A. JAVED DAMION M. YOUNG __________________________________________________________________ Staff Editors RAYMOND AUBELE AMY N. HUDACK JAMIE L. RICE CARLOS BACIO MEGAN A. LEE JAMIE L. TRAXLER HOPE C. BLAIN DANTE P. LOGIE BRANDON R. SALVATIERRA GEORGE E. BRIETIGAM DRAKE A. MIRSCH HANNAH B. STETSON KATHERINE A. BURGESS MARLENA MLYNARSKA SYDNEY L. WEST KYLEY S. CHELWICK NICHOLE N. MOVASSAGHI Faculty Advisor CELESTINE MCCONVILLE, Professor of Law CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY HAZEM H. CHEHABI ADMINISTRATION JEROME W. CWIERTNIA DALE E. FOWLER ’58 DANIELE C. STRUPPA BARRY GOLDFARB President STAN HARRELSON GAVIN S. HERBERT,JR. GLENN M. PFEIFFER WILLIAM K. HOOD Provost and Executive Vice ANDY HOROWITZ President for Academic Affairs MARK CHAPIN JOHNSON ’05 JENNIFER L. KELLER HAROLD W. HEWITT,JR. THOMAS E. MALLOY Executive Vice President and Chief SEBASTIAN PAUL MUSCO Operating Officer RICHARD MUTH (MBA ’05) JAMES J. PETERSON SHERYL A. BOURGEOIS HARRY S. RINKER Executive Vice President for JAMES B. ROSZAK University Advancement THE HONORABLE LORETTA SANCHEZ ’82 HELEN NORRIS MOHINDAR S. SANDHU Vice President and Chief RONALD M. SIMON Information Officer RONALD E. SODERLING KAREN R. WILKINSON ’69 THOMAS C. PIECHOTA DAVID W.
  • Ms Barnewsfall2014.Pdf

    Ms Barnewsfall2014.Pdf

    VOL. LXI FALL 2014 NO. 1 Front Row: Mark B. Higdon; Mark A. Bilbrey; John T. Cossar; Rande K. Yeager; J.M. “Mike” Sellari Back Row: J. Walter Michel; James M. Ingram; Robert Lampton; Harry M. Walker; W. Parrish Fortenberry; Ronnie Smith; Chip Triplett; Stewart R. Speed; Larry E. Favreau We may dress casually, but we’re serious about your title business. Title insurance isn’t something you trust to just anybody. That’s why we’ve assembled a team of the most respected business leaders around for our board of directors. eir vision and integrity have helped make Mississippi Valley Title the leading title insurance company in Mississippi. Add to that our sta’s local knowledge and experience and you have a very serious title insurance partner. Call us today. 601.969.0222 | 800.647.2124 | www.mvt.com Expert underwriters to help you navigate complicated transactions Another reason why Stewart is the right underwriter for you. Choose Stewart Title Guaranty Company as your underwriter, and you’ll be able to call upon the unsurpassed experience of our underwriting team. With hundreds of years of cumulative experience, our experts have the in-depth knowledge necessary to guide you through complex issues. Plus, Stewart also provides our issuing agencies with access to Virtual Underwriter ®, our online resource that provides 24/7 access to all the information needed to close a transaction. Contact us today for more information on why Stewart is the right underwriter for you. (601) 977-9776 stewart.com/mississippi Danny L. Crotwell, Esq. Sean M. Culhane, Esq.
  • The Dilemma of a Civil Libertarian: Francis Biddle and the Smith Act

    The Dilemma of a Civil Libertarian: Francis Biddle and the Smith Act

    Journal of the Minnesota Academy of Science Volume 34 Number 2 Article 22 1967 The Dilemma of a Civil Libertarian: Francis Biddle and the Smith Act Thomas L. Pahl Mankato State College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.morris.umn.edu/jmas Part of the American Politics Commons Recommended Citation Pahl, T. L. (1967). The Dilemma of a Civil Libertarian: Francis Biddle and the Smith Act. Journal of the Minnesota Academy of Science, Vol. 34 No.2, 161-164. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.morris.umn.edu/jmas/vol34/iss2/22 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Minnesota Morris Digital Well. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Minnesota Academy of Science by an authorized editor of University of Minnesota Morris Digital Well. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Dilemma of a Civil Libertarian: Francis Biddle And the Smith Act THOMAS L. PAHL Mankato State College ABSTRACT - Although society may have good reasons for protecting itself against both sedition and conspiracy, history demonstrates that statutes directed against these offenses are particularly prone to result in the abuse of power. A possibility of just such an abuse in the first application of the Smith Act - the Minneapolis Trotskyite trial of 1941 - led to a consideration of a civil libertarian caught in the cross-pressure of enforcing a law anathema to his professed liberal be­ liefs. The study showed that, during time of threat, internal or external, our democratic society permits our government officials, in the name of survival, to limit those freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution.