6 edition of Reports of the Special Masters of the United States Supreme Court in the Submerged Lands Cases found in the catalog.
July 1, 1991
by Landmark Enterprises
Written in English
|Contributions||John Briscoe (Editor), C. Thomas Koester (Editor)|
|The Physical Object|
|Number of Pages||1066|
Duryee, 1t1 U.S. (7 Cranch) (), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the merits of a case, as settled by courts of one state, must be recognized by the courts of other states; state courts may not reopen cases which have been conclusively decided by the courts of another state. The matter was then referred back to the Special Master to locate the actual boundary. At that point, Louisiana petitioned the Supreme Court to have the Master fix the boundary to the extent of Louisiana's claim under the Submerged Lands Act and to make the United States party to the suit.
The United States Supreme Court appointed a special master, Ralph I. Lancaster, Jr., to manage pre-trial proceedings, take evidence, and prepare a report recommending a decision. This is the Court's usual practice in its original jurisdiction cases. The Special Master's recommendations do not bind the Court, which may accept, reject, or change. United States Supreme Court. UNITED STATES v. MAINE() No. 35 Argued: Decided: Ma The United States, to the exclusion of defendant Atlantic Coastal States, held to have sovereign rights over the seabed and subsoil underlying the Atlantic Ocean, lying more than three geographical miles seaward from the ordinary low-water mark and from the outer limits of inland coastal waters.
The Twelve-Mile Circle is an approximately circular arc which forms most of the boundary between the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the State of Delaware in the United is not actually a circle, but rather a combination of different circular arcs that have been feathered together. It is nominally a circle with a supposed—yet in fact only approximate and variable—mile (19 km. In Alaska States, U.S. 75 (), a nearly unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held against a claim asserted by the State of Alaska to certain submerged lands underlying waters in Southeast Alaska, including lands in between and fringing the southeastern Alaska islands known as the Alexander Archipelago.. This case was handled as part of the original jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme.
On Sunday the 1st of August, will be sung at Trinity Church, by the Reverend Benjamin Blagrove, the following anthems, accompanied with the organ.
Introduction to ferromagnetism.
Royal succession in the African kingdom of Nso
Everyday life in Italy.
Stained glass windows for Abberley Hall School Chapel.
principles of ante-natal and post-natal child physiology
A30 Electronics for Auto Technicians Package
Portfolio on audio-visual materials.
Alexander Pope; tradition and identity.
Teaching the culturally disadvantaged
The literary remains of Charles Stuart Calverley
Below are links to reports issued by Special Masters in original cases between and November Special Master reports issued after Novemare available on the docket sheet for the particular case. Original No.Florida v. Georgia Report 2/16/; Original No. Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado Report 2/13/ Get this from a library.
The Reports of the special masters of the United States Supreme Court in the submerged lands cases, [Michael W Reed; G Thomas Koester; John Briscoe; United States.
Supreme Court.;]. Original No. Montana v. Wyoming and North Dakota; Original No.South Carolina v. North Carolina; Original No.Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Louisiana, U.S. 93 () United States v. Louisiana (Alabama and Mississippi Boundary Case) No.
9, Orig. ¥Argued Novem ¥Decided Febru ¥ U.S. ON EXCEPTIONS TO REPORT OF SPECIAL MASTER Syllabus. Special Master gave thorough consideration to the written and oral submissions of the parties. In a detailed report he now recommends the grant of summary judgment to the United States with respect to all the submerged lands in dispute.
Report of Special Master 1 (hereinafter Report or Special Master™s Report). We set the case for oral ar. After appointment, the Special Master is given significant independence and influence over the proceedings.
Supreme Court Rule even allows the Master to use the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence merely as guides when establishing case facts. After establishing the record, the Master files his or her report in booklet format.
n o.o riginal i n the s upreme c our t of the u nite d s tates o ct ober t erm, s t a te of a laska, plaintiff, v.
u nite d s t a tes of a merica, defendant. repor t of the special master on six. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. OCTOBER TERM, Syllabus.
UNITED STATES v. ALASKA. ON EXCEPTIONS TO REPORT OF SPECIAL MASTER. 84, Orig. Argued Febru Decided J This suit involves a dispute between the United States and Alaska over the ownership of submerged lands along the State's Arctic Coast.
The United States filed an amended complaint reviving the Special Master's Report and redescribing the issues as modified by the Submerged Lands Act; both the United States and California filed new exceptions to the Report, and the case is now ready for decision.
The Office of Special Masters—an office within the United States Court of Federal Claims, see 42 U.S.C. § aa(c)—maintains a list of attorneys as a service to petitioners seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Program established by the Department of Health and Human Services.
See 42 U.S.C. §§ aa-1, 12(a). We had earlier held that the coastal States had no claim to the submerged lands off their coastlines, and that the United States had paramount rights in these lands.
United States v. California, U. 19 (). This holding was applied to Louisiana and Texas in our first Louisiana decision. United States v. Louisiana, U. In a detailed report he now recommends the grant of summary judgment to the United States with respect to all the submerged lands in dispute.
Report of Special Master 1 (hereinafter Report or Special Master’s Report). We set the case for oral argument on Alaska’s exceptions to the Special Master’s Report. U.S. ___ ().
United States Supreme Court. RHODE ISLAND AND NEW YORK BOUNDARY CASE() No. 35 Argued: Novem Decided: Febru The United States brought this action against the 13 States that border the Atlantic Ocean to determine whether the United States had exclusive rights to the seabed and subsoil underlying the ocean beyond three geographical miles from each State's.
OCLC Number: Notes: Cover title. Description: 88, i, 82 pages ; 24 cm: Contents: In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, no. bringing suit, including the filing of a timely administrative claim. Indeed, this question was all but decided in United States v.
Kreider Co., U.where the Court held that the Bound Volume The dashed line indicates the bottom edge of the book. Though the Court is able, on the basis of the materials now before it, to decide many issues involving application of the Convention to the Louisiana coast, the Court has decided to refer to a Special Master several particularized disputes over the precise boundary between submerged Gulf lands belonging to the United States and those belonging.
By Chief Justice. Court historians and other legal scholars consider each Chief Justice of the United States who presides over the Supreme Court of the United States to be the head of an era of the Court. These lists are sorted chronologically by Chief Justice and include most major cases decided by the Court.
Alaska invoked the Court’s jurisdiction to referee the submerged lands claims between it and the United States. The Supreme Court appointed a Special Master to evaluate Alaska’s claims; the Special Master recommended judgment for the United States as title-holder of the submerged lands; and the Supreme Court affirmed that decision.
The term often appears in original jurisdiction cases decided by the Supreme Court ; these are often cases involving boundary disputes between the states, with a special master appointed to resolve questions of geography or historical claims.
See, for example, New Jersey v. Utah and the United States, however, are not alone in advancing claims to the still submerged and non-relicted portions of the lake. Morton also claims part of the property, and seeks to intervene to quiet its title.
Our Special Master's Report carefully sets out the nature of the competing claims of the two sovereigns and the private landlord: '1. The State's objections to the Report were overruled. United States v. Florida, U.S. (). 5 A final decree was entered providing that, as against the State of Florida, the United States was entitled to the lands, minerals, and other natural resources in the area in which the remains of the Atocha had come to rest.
United States v.The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States of has ultimate (and largely discretionary) appellate jurisdiction over all federal and state court cases that involve a point of federal law, and original jurisdiction over a narrow range of cases, specifically "all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers.Title U.S.
Reports: United States v. Alaska, U.S. (). Contributor Names Blackmun, Harry A. (Judge).