Supreme Court of the United States, 1962

Justice Goldberg's opinion held that the Court of Appeals should have treated petitioner's second notice of appeal as reaching the underlying dismissal because her intent to seek review was manifest and the defect neither misled nor prejudiced respondent.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice White, held that the Interstate Commerce Commission improvidently granted permanent operating authority to remedy service interruptions caused by union-induced refusals to handle freight without explaining why certification was preferable to a cease-and-desist order.

The Supreme Court reversed the district court’s dismissal of thirty‑four mail‑fraud counts and the conspiracy count, holding that the indictment sufficiently alleged that the mailed acceptances were used “for the purpose of executing” the fraudulent scheme.

The Court held that the indictment adequately alleged mail fraud because the defendants’ planned mailings to reassure victims and conceal the fraud could constitute use of the mails for executing the fraudulent scheme, even though the defendants had already obtained the victims’ money.

The Court affirmed the judgment sustaining dismissal of Link's negligence action for failure to prosecute. Harlan's four-Justice opinion concluded that federal courts possess inherent authority to dismiss actions sua sponte, that Rule 41(b) does not displace that authority, and that advance notice and an adversary…

The Court held that New York violated the Establishment Clause by directing public schools to begin each day with a government-composed prayer, even though students could decline to participate.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Stewart, held that California could not criminally punish the status of narcotic addiction without requiring proof of narcotics use or other unlawful conduct within the State.

The Court, in an opinion by Chief Justice Warren, affirmed the judgment requiring Brown to divest Kinney. It held that the decree was sufficiently final for direct review under the Expediting Act despite the need to formulate a detailed divestiture plan.

The Court held that Georgia violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments by punishing an elected sheriff for public statements criticizing a judicial charge directing a grand jury to investigate alleged vote buying.

The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of Sinclair Refining’s suit, holding that § 301 of the Taft‑Hartley Act does not repeal the anti‑injunction provisions of § 4 of the Norris‑LaGuardia Act, so federal courts lack jurisdiction to enjoin strikes arising from labor disputes even when the dispute is subject to a…

The Court held that a lawyer’s mere statement of intent to ask prohibited questions, without any actual obstruction of the court’s proceedings, does not satisfy the statutory requirement of obstruction for summary contempt under 18 U.S.C. §401, and therefore reversed the contempt conviction.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice White, affirmed the stay of the employer's § 301 damages action pending arbitration. The collective bargaining agreement's broad arbitration clause covered claims for damages from an alleged breach of its no-strike clause, and the circumstances surrounding the alleged one-day strike…

The Court held that the employer's claim for damages arising from an alleged union strike was subject to arbitration under the collective bargaining agreement's comprehensive grievance and arbitration clause.

The Court held that § 301 of the Taft‑Hartley Act does not repeal the anti‑injunction provisions of § 4 of the Norris‑LaGuardia Act, so federal courts lack jurisdiction to grant injunctions against strikes arising from labor disputes even when brought under § 301; the district court’s dismissal was affirmed.

The Court affirmed Lanza's conviction for refusing to answer a legislative committee's questions after receiving immunity. Justice Stewart's opinion concluded that at least two questions arose independently of the intercepted jail conversation and that the record did not support the claim that the interception caused…

The Court affirmed the conviction because at least two questions the petitioner refused to answer were unrelated to the intercepted jail conversation and independently supported the judgment.

Reviewing six identically defective indictments, the Supreme Court reversed convictions under 2 U.S.C. § 192 for refusing to answer congressional subcommittee questions on a single common ground: each indictment alleged only that the refused questions 'were pertinent to the question then under inquiry' without…

The Court, per curiam, reversed summary judgment for Diebold in the Government’s Clayton Act challenge to its acquisition of Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Company. The District Court’s findings supporting the failing-company defense resolved a factual controversy and selected among competing inferences.

Justice Brennan's opinion held that Carnley's illiteracy, the legal complexities surrounding his prosecution, and the procedural and evidentiary difficulties at trial made assistance of counsel constitutionally necessary absent an intelligent and understanding waiver.

Chief Justice Warren's opinion held that good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 is judged objectively: an indigent criminal defendant may appeal in forma pauperis when presenting any nonfrivolous issue.

The Supreme Court reversed the Fifth Circuit’s refusal to enforce NLRB reinstatement orders, holding that the appellate court must apply the uniform substantial‑evidence standard articulated in Universal Camera rather than the special credibility test from Tex‑O‑Kan; the cases were remanded for reconsideration.

The Supreme Court reversed the Fifth Circuit’s decisions, holding that the proper standard of review for National Labor Relations Board reinstatement orders is the uniform substantial‑evidence test articulated in Universal Camera and Pittsburgh S.S.

Justice Brennan's opinion held that the District Court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the voters' equal protection challenge to Tennessee's legislative apportionment, that the voters had standing, and that their complaint presented a justiciable constitutional claim rather than a political question.

The Supreme Court reversed the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, holding that Allegheny County took an air easement over Griggs's property and must provide just compensation under the Fourteenth Amendment Takings Clause. The Court relied on United States v.

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Douglas, held that frequent, low-altitude airport flights that rendered Griggs' home unbearable for residential use constituted a taking of an air easement requiring compensation under the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Court, through Justice Clark, affirmed the denial of both habeas petitions. Due process requires reasonable notice and an opportunity to contest a recidivist accusation, but not notice before trial on the underlying offense.

The Supreme Court reversed a summary judgment dismissing Lou Poller's Sherman Act treble-damage action, which alleged that CBS and others conspired in 1954 to eliminate WCAN, a successful UHF television station in Milwaukee, by having an intermediary option a rival UHF station, canceling WCAN's network affiliation…

Justice Stewart's majority opinion held that a sentencing court's failure expressly to invite a represented defendant to speak, without additional aggravating circumstances, does not support collateral relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.