v. Swint United Steelworkers of America v. Swint, PULLMAN-STANDARD
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | WHITE |
| Citation | 456 U.S. 273,102 S.Ct. 1781,72 L.Ed.2d 66 |
| Parties | , a Division of Pullman, Incorporated, Petitioner, v. Louis SWINT and Willie Johnson, etc. UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA,, et al., Petitioners v. Louis SWINT and Willie James Johnson |
| Docket Number | PULLMAN-STANDARD,80-1193,AFL-CIO,Nos. 80-1190 |
| Decision Date | 27 April 1982 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
1717 practice notes
-
Aspen Skiing Co. v. Cherrett (In re Cherrett), No. 14-60079.
...or to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated." Pullman-Standard v. Swint , 456 U.S. 273, 289 n.19, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982). "Mixed questions are typically reviewed de novo, but, depending on the nature of the inquir......
-
Mondaca-Vega v. Holder, No. 03–71369.
...intent to be in this context—but to findings that “clearly [imply] the application of standards of law.” [Id.]Pullman–Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 286 n. 16, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982) (emphasis added) (alteration in original). And the Supreme Court has rejected Baumgartner's ......
-
Poindexter v. F.B.I., No. 83-1151
...that the appellant's challenges fall far short of that required for reversal on this ground. See generally Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 287, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 1787, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982). 8 Caston, 556 F.2d at 1308 (holding that a trial court's decision on appointment is immediatel......
-
Miller v. Fenton, No. 83-5530
...shown considerable concern for segregating "factual" and "legal" issues for purposes of appellate review. See Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 287-88, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 1789-90, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982) ("ultimate" findings of fact, which are dispositive of the legal issues involved, are ......
Request a trial to view additional results
1659 cases
-
Aspen Skiing Co. v. Cherrett (In re Cherrett), No. 14-60079.
...or to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated." Pullman-Standard v. Swint , 456 U.S. 273, 289 n.19, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982). "Mixed questions are typically reviewed de novo, but, depending on the nature of the inquir......
-
Mondaca-Vega v. Holder, No. 03–71369.
...intent to be in this context—but to findings that “clearly [imply] the application of standards of law.” [Id.]Pullman–Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 286 n. 16, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982) (emphasis added) (alteration in original). And the Supreme Court has rejected Baumgartner's ......
-
Miller v. Fenton, No. 83-5530
...shown considerable concern for segregating "factual" and "legal" issues for purposes of appellate review. See Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 287-88, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 1789-90, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982) ("ultimate" findings of fact, which are dispositive of the legal issues involved, are ......
-
Coors Brewing Co. v. Mendez–torres, Civil No. 06–2150(DRD).
...judgment is to be issued “sparingly” in litigation “where motive and intent play leading roles”); see also Pullman–Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 288, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982) (“[F]indings as to design, motive and intent with which men act [are] peculiarly factual issues for t......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
CROSS-STATUTE EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS AND THE NEED FOR A 'SUPER STATUTE'.
...because it cited Gross. Id. (161.) Id. (162.) Id. (163.) Id. (164.) Frappied, 966 F.3d at 1045 (citing Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273,276 (165.) Id. (citing Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 1731, 1739 (2020)). (166.) Id. (167.) Id. at 1047. (168.) Id. at 1046 (citing Phillips ......