Web Results

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._Johnson

Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated prohibitions on desecrating the American flag enforced in 48 of the 50 states. Justice William Brennan wrote for a five-justice majority in holding that the defendant Gregory Lee Johnson's act of flag burning was ...

www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-7120_p86b.pdf

Jun 26, 2015 ... The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Syllabus. JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES.

www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-texas-v-johnson

Facts and Case Summary - Texas v. Johnson. Facts and case summary for Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989). Flag burning constitutes symbolic speech that is protected by the First Amendment.

www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/supreme-court-landmarks/texas-v-johnson-podcast

During the convention Gregory Lee Johnson and a group of political activists marched through the streets protesting. When the demonstrators reached Dallas City Hall, Johnson poured kerosene on an American flag and burned it. Johnson was arrested and convicted under a Texas state law. In an appeal, Johnson argued ...

supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/425/238

U.S. Supreme Court. Kelley v. Johnson, 425 U.S. 238 (1976). Kelley v. Johnson. No. 74-1269. Argued December 8, 1975. Decided April 5, 1976. 425 U.S. 238. Syllabus. A county regulation limiting the length of county policemen's hair held not to violate any right guaranteed respondent policeman by the Fourteenth ...

h2o.law.harvard.edu/cases/366

Jun 13, 2013 ... See McGill v. Mich. S. S. Co., 144 F. 788 (C. C. A. 9). There can be no assumption that a substantial number of empty barges containing explosive gases have been exposed to thunderstorms in the face of evidence disclosing a generally approved practice for removing gases. It needs no illustration to ...

casetext.com/case/johnson-v-southern-pacific-co-3

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court. This case was brought here on certiorari, and also on writ of error, and will be determined on the merits, without discussing the question of jurisdiction as between the one writ and the other. Pullman's Car Company v.

masscases.com/cases/sjc/320/320mass336.html

Newton v. Worcester, 174 Mass. 181 , 186. Sheehan v. Lynn, 269 Mass. 571 , 572. The plaintiff argues that the sloping of the sidewalk was such a defect. ... was no danger so substantial that a reasonable man in the position of the defendant would have anticipated injury and guarded against it." Pastrick v. S. S. Kresge Co.

www.justice.gov/opa/file/877426/download

Jul 19, 2016 ... York and elsewhere, the defendants MARK JOHNSON and STUART SCOTT, together with others, did ..... V. Conclusion. WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, your deponent respectfully requests that arrest warrants be issued for the defendants MARK JOHNSON and STUART SCOTT so that they may be ...