Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.

ALBERT HOWLETT v. BIRKDALE SHIPPING CO., S. A. (1994)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
ALBERT HOWLETT v. BIRKDALE SHIPPING CO., S. A.
Term: 1993
Important Dates
Argued: April 20, 1994
Decided: June 13, 1994
Outcome
Vacated and remanded
Vote
9-0
Majority
Harry BlackmunRuth Bader GinsburgAnthony KennedySandra Day O'ConnorWilliam RehnquistAntonin ScaliaDavid SouterJohn Paul StevensClarence Thomas

ALBERT HOWLETT v. BIRKDALE SHIPPING CO., S. A. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 13, 1994. The case was argued before the court on April 20, 1994.

In a 9-0 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. The case originated from the Pennsylvania Eastern U.S. District Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1990s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Rehnquist Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Economic Activity - Liability, other than as in sufficiency of evidence, election of remedies, punitive damages
  • Petitioner: Employee, or job applicant, including beneficiaries of
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: employer. If employer's relations with employees are governed by the nature of the employer's business (e.g., railroad, boat), rather than labor law generally, the more specific designation is used in place of Employer.
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 512 U.S. 92
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: William Rehnquist
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: Anthony Kennedy

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes