 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Lujan v. Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n, No. 89-640,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, June 27, 1990, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The federation was a proper party to challenge the bureau's actions by showing it was adversely affected or aggrieved by those actions. The federation met the zone of interests test under the National Environmental Policy Act and the FLMPA by alleging that its recreational use and aesthetic enjoyment of the land would be adversely affected. Two affidavits had been submitted by the federation to contest the motion for summary judgment when it was first presented. The Court held that these failed to raise an issue of material fact. There was no showing that affiants' recreational use and enjoyment extended to particular acres, which were withdrawn out of the thousands of acres of land that were not. The conclusory statements lacked the specificity needed to show facts in dispute. The Court also ruled that the trial court had rightfully rejected accepting additional affidavits that were proffered after the matter had been remanded on the first appeal. These affidavits failed to direct their attack against specific agency action. Some concrete action applying the regulation was necessary before the action could be ripe for review. The Court also found the affidavits to be untimely.
|
|||||
| Md. v. Craig, No. 89-478,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, June 27, 1990, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Respondent was charged with child abuse, first and second degree sexual offenses, perverted sexual practice, assault, and battery. The named victim was a six-year-old girl who attended a kindergarten center operated by respondent. Before trial, the state sought to invoke a state statutory procedure that permitted testimony of the alleged victim to be received by one-way closed circuit television. Respondent objected to the procedure on the basis of his right to confrontation under U.S. Const. amend. VI. The trial court rejected respondent's contention, and respondent was convicted on all counts. The state court of appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial. The court granted certiorari and vacated and remanded, holding that the court of appeals improperly required the trial court observe the child's behavior in respondent's presence and make a specific finding that the child would suffer severe emotional distress if he or she were to testify by two-way closed circuit television. The court held that the state only needed to show that testimony by one-way closed circuit television was required to protect the child from the trauma caused by testifying in respondent's presence.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
