Supreme Court Decisions

About: Supreme Court Decisions is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1804 publications have been published within this topic receiving 17066 citations.

Cases and materials on patent law : including trade secrets, copyrights, trademarks

Abstract: The Sixth Edition has been completely updated and includes new Supreme Court decisions on claim construction, injunctions and plant patents. It also includes new en banc decisions of the CAFC. There is also a new Teacher's Manual that includes case outlines, interesting materials, and teaching points. In addition the new edition of the Teacher's Manual includes: Amusing patents and famous patents for teachers to share with students to enrich and inform their study A portion of an oral argument to make a point about always being prepared Detailed case outlines for all of the cases in the book A discussion about critical theory (i.e. text interpretation) as it relates to patent law Writings by judges on the practice of patent law A sample writing assignment Sample final examinations for both 2- and 3-credit hour courses

Cruzan: facing the inevitable

Abstract: When the United States Supreme Court upheld’ the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court that it was not in the best interests of Nancy Cruzan to die of dehydration and malnutrition by withholding from her food and fluids provided by tube? the result was deplored by many legal and popular commentators. The criticism suggested a wide range of values and reasoning that were reflected in the various briefs filed in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of reversing the Missouri court decision. The objections might be placed in three categories: the medical, the legal, and the ethical. The medical rationale for reversal of the Missouri Supreme Court categorized provision of food and fluids by tube as a “medical treatment” and, hence, subject to practices that pertain to forgoing other, more obvious forms of medical treatment, such as use of respirators or chemotherapy.3 It also, perhaps more importantly, presumed that those in a “persistent vegetative state,” such as Ms. Cruzan, are more properly subject to a diminished standard of care than those who are no@presumably, on the grounds that those in such a state are permanently non-conscious, and that human beings who will permanently lack consciousness do not warrant the same standard of care as those who are deemed even partially conscious.5 The ethical rationale argued that it was appropriate to forgo food and fluids, at least if provided by tube, from persons in Ms. Cruzan’s condition because the benefit of continued life in such a condition was nonexistent or minimal in comparison to the burden of continuing to provide them treatment or to the burden of their overall care.6 The legal rationale, with which we are primarily concerned here, assumed a constitutional right in refusal of treatment or care that survives incompetency fully intact and is properly exercised by third-parties closely associated with the affected person, such as family members, rather than by the state.7 For a variety of reasons, all of these arguments failed to persuade the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court that there was sufficient justification in the U.S. Constitution to overrule the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision that Nancy Cruzan should continue to be provided food and fluids necessary to sustain her life. It is our view that at least the result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision was or should have been seen as inevitable. This is so not only because of the jurisprudence of the present Court, but also because logic and legal history dictated as much, and, most importantly, because of the consequences that would have flowed from a decision reversing the Missouri Supreme Court on the basis of principles alleged to flow from the U.S. Constitution. From this perspective, this article will analyze the Court’s decision: What it held, what it did not hold, implications of the decision for future litigation and legislation, implications of a contrary result, and suggested legislative “solutions” to the supposed problem that Cruzan presents.

Perspectives on affirmative action in academic dental institutions: the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the University of Michigan cases.

Abstract: In June 2003 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of using race as a factor in higher education admissions decisions. This article considers the impact of the Supreme Court decisions on admissions procedures at selected academic dental institutions (ADI) and their parent institutions. We interviewed fifty-eight leaders considered to be individual stakeholders at seven ADI and their related parent institutions, state dental associations, and state legislatures using a common set of questions about the Supreme Court decisions. Educators from the ADI and their parent institutions were consistent in their responses that the rulings upheld affirmative action as necessary to achieve diversity. State organized dentistry officials did not appear to be as aware as others of the rulings, whereas legislators were mixed in their responses. Except for the University of Michigan undergraduate admissions procedures, it remains to be seen what the impact will be for other higher education institutions and for academic dental institutions. Although the rulings have provided guidelines for achieving diversity using race/ ethnicity as one of several factors, the rulings will possibly be challenged, thus requiring vigilance on the part of parent institutions and their ADI to ensure compliance with the spirit of the rulings and to avoid attack from opponents of affirmative action.