Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Randall
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Randall, 484 U.S. 1027 (1988)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1988-01-19
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- rejecting Colonel North's constitutional challenge to subpoena and affirming contempt order
- a plaintiff’s § 1983 claim for damages against police officer for injuries sustained in effecting arrest appropriately invokes fourth amendment protections against unreasonable use of force
- “When the plaintiff files a notice of dismissal [pursuant to Rule 41(a)(l)(i) ] ... the dismissal takes effect automatically: the trial judge has no role to play at all.”
- “Courts have almost never found that an ongoing investigation imposes a sufficient hardship on the person investigated to warrant judicial review prior to his or her indictment.”
- authorization under section 515(a) requires specific direction, not a “letter of authority”
- statement during the providence inquiry that prior to the killing victim hit the accused in the head with a toaster was not substantial indication accused acted from adequate provocation which might reduce murder to manslaughter
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Randall. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Authority status
- pending
- Cited by
- 147 opinions
C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.