Datasets:

LavanyaPobbathi
/

lamus-scotus-legal-arguments

row_id int64 0 2.54M	sentence stringlengths 20 40.2k	case_title stringlengths 30 132	citation stringlengths 16 20	docket_number stringlengths 15 19 ⌀	source_field stringclasses 4 values	court stringclasses 8 values	year int64 1.92k 2.03k	source_file stringclasses 85 values	Predicted_Label stringclasses 6 values	source stringclasses 21 values	date_decided stringclasses 603 values	url stringlengths 50 57 ⌀
0	U.S. Supreme Court NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION v. STUART , 423 U.S. 1027 (1975) 423 U.S. 1027 NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION et al., petitioners, v.	NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION v. STUART, 423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
4	Mr. Justice BRENNAN, Mr. Justice STEWART, and Mr. Justice MARSHALL would grant motion. 3.	NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION v. STUART, 423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
8	He joins the Court in granting the petition for writ of certiorari and in ordering plenary consideration of this case, which as he understands it raises issues broader than the power of the State to enjoin the publication of facts disclosed at a public hearing in a State court.	NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION v. STUART, 423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Conclusion	null	null	null
12	U.S. Supreme Court NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION v. STUART , 423 U.S. 1027 (1975) 423 U.S. 1027 NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION et al., petitioners, v.	NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION v. STUART, 423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
16	Mr. Justice BRENNAN, Mr. Justice STEWART, and Mr. Justice MARSHALL would grant motion. 3.	NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION v. STUART, 423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
20	He joins the Court in granting the petition for writ of certiorari and in ordering plenary consideration of this case, which as he understands it raises issues broader than the power of the State to enjoin the publication of facts disclosed at a public hearing in a State court.	NEBRASKA PRESS ASSOCIATION v. STUART, 423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	423 U.S. 1027 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Conclusion	null	null	null
24	U.S. Supreme Court Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975) Weinstein v. Bradford No. 74-1287 Decided December 10, 1975 423 U.S. 147 Syllabus Where respondent was paroled after the Court of Appeals upheld his claim in his action against petitioner parole board members that he was constitutionally entitled to certain procedural rights in connection with petitioners' consideration of his eligibility for parole, the case is moot, and does not present an issue "capable of repetition, yet evading review," since the action is not a class action and there is no demonstrated probability that respondent will again be subjected to the parole system.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
28	Super Tire Engineering Co. v. McCorkle, 416 U.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
32	On respondent's appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, that court sustained his claim that he was constitutionally entitled to procedural rights in connection with petitioners' consideration of his application for parole.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
36	It is undisputed that respondent was temporarily paroled on December 18, 1974, and that this status ripened into a complete release from supervision on March 25, 1975.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
40	S. 115 (1974), to support their contention that the case is not moot.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
44	But in the instant case, respondent, who challenged the "governmental action or policy" in question, no longer has any present interest affected by that policy.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
48	S. 149 branch of the law of mootness.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
52	S. 814 (1969); SEC v. Medical Committee for Human Rights, 404 U.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
56	The instant case, not a class action, clearly does not satisfy the latter element.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
60	S. 128 (1975); United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.	Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147 (1975)	423 U.S. 147 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
64	After two interim stays by single judges of the Court of Appeals, a panel of that court denied a further stay on December 2, 1975, but ordered expedited argument.	Pasadena City Bd. of Ed. v. Spangler, 423 U.S. 1335 (1975)	423 U.S. 1335 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
68	The result of the District Court's order and the subsequent stay rulings of the Court of Appeals is that, if I decline to stay the order, there will be at least some disruption of the school system in the middle of a school year.	Pasadena City Bd. of Ed. v. Spangler, 423 U.S. 1335 (1975)	423 U.S. 1335 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
72	U.S. Supreme Court American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975) American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise No. 74-966 Argued October 14, 1975 Decided December 16, 1975 423 U.S. 150 Syllabus Respondent's decedent, a seaman, was discharged for misconduct from petitioner's ship while it was docked in South Vietnam.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
76	He contended that petitioner was liable to him for the $510, and for an added sum pursuant to 46 U.S.C. § 596, which requires the master or owner of a vessel making foreign voyages to pay a discharged seaman his wages within four days after the discharge, and, upon refusal or neglect to make such payment "without sufficient cause," to pay the seaman a sum equal to two days' pay for every day during which payment is delayed.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
80	Held: Under the circumstances, the transaction resulting in the seaman's receipt of an airline ticket purchased with money owed to him as wages constituted a payment of wages, and therefore there was no refusal or neglect to make payment, and hence no liability, under § 596.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Conclusion	null	null	null
84	Reversed and remanded; see 488 F.2d 469.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Conclusion	null	null	null
88	When the seaman arrived back in the United States, he received the $118.45.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
92	The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that § 596 requires that wage payments be made directly to the seaman, and that therefore the $510 paid to the airline could not be regarded as a partial payment of wages.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Conclusion	null	null	null
96	Since the transaction was a partial payment of wages and not a "deduction Page 423 U.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
100	JUSTICE MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
104	Title 46 U.S.C. § 596 provides in relevant part: "The master or owner of any vessel [making foreign voyages] shall pay to every seaman his wages . . . within twenty-four hours after the cargo has been discharged, or within four days after the seaman has been discharged, whichever first happens. . . .	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
108	This being so, petitioner incurred no liability under § 596.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Conclusion	null	null	null
112	On March 19, the date of the fifth log entry, the master decided that Matise should be discharged.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
116	But payment in a form enabling Matise to secure transportation back to the United States was no easy matter.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
120	S. 154 In order to resolve the resulting dilemma, Vietnamese Customs officials gave the ship's master special permission to break the seal on the ship's safe and to remove enough money to purchase an airline ticket to the United States.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
124	S. 155 equivalent of payment of monies over to the seaman." Having found that the purchase of the airline ticket for $510 constituted a partial payment of wages, the District Court concluded that petitioner had not "refuse[d] or neglect[ed]" to pay and had therefore incurred no liability under § 596.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
128	S. 779 (1952), that only deductions and setoffs for derelictions of duty specifically provided for by Congress could lawfully be deducted from a seaman's wages, the Court of Appeals concluded that, since the statutory scheme does not provide for setoffs for return transportation expenses, the "withholding" here at issue was improper, and was without "sufficient cause" under § 596.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
132	In Isbrandtsen Co. v. Johnson, supra, on which the Court of Appeals heavily relied, there was no question that what this Court was faced with was a refusal or neglect to make payment.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
136	The situation before us today is quite different from that in Isbrandtsen.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
140	S. 158 transaction in question constituted a partial payment of Matise's wages.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
144	S. 159 The Court of Appeals' conclusion that the "payment" went to the airline, and not to Matise, does not necessarily follow from the facts of this case.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
148	The obvious concern of § 596 is that the shipowner not unlawfully withhold wages, and thereby unjustly enrich himself while wrongfully denying the seaman the benefits of his labor.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
152	Respondent advanced an alternative theory during oral argument to support the contention that petitioner neglected to make payment under § 596.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
156	As we have indicated above, however, the airline ticket transaction in this case is not a "deduction from" Matise's wages, but rather is itself a partial payment of wages.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
160	In this case, there was no impropriety either in the discharge itself or in the payment of wages to Matise.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
164	The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Conclusion	null	null	null
168	Mavromatis v. United Greek Shipowners Corp., 179 F.2d 310 (CA1 1950); Forster v. Oro Navigation Co., 228 F.2d 319 (CA2 1955), aff'g 128 F.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
172	Once such a release is signed, it "shall operate as a mutual discharge and settlement of all demands for wages between the parties thereto, on account of wages, in respect of the past voyage or engagement," § 644, except that "any court having jurisdiction may upon good cause shown set aside such release and take such action as justice shall require." § 597. [Footnote 7] Granville Matise died during the pendency of the suit.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
176	See Tr. of Oral Arg. 27, 31. [Footnote 11] 46 U.S.C. §§ 659, 663, 701, 707. [Footnote 12] The Court of Appeals rejected the District Court's finding that Matise had consented to the purchase of the airline ticket with part of the wages due him, in part because of its conclusion that Matise was "compelled to sign the release and Wage Voucher in order to receive the remainder of his wages that admittedly were due." 488 F.2d at 473.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
180	Accordingly, the District Court's finding that Matise had consented to and approved the form and amount of his wage payment was not clearly erroneous, and should have been respected by the Court of Appeals. [Footnote 13] To the extent that the respondent in Isbrandtsen Co. v. Johnson, 343 U.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
184	A shipowner's obligation to repatriate a seaman discharged in a foreign port depends on the circumstances of the discharge.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
188	Supp. 924 (SDNY 1943); The Centennial, 10 F. 397 (ED La. 1881); 1 M.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
192	Nothing in Isbrandtsen suggests that, when a seaman concedes that his discharge for misconduct is warranted, the shipowner must pay for the seaman's repatriation, and only later claim reimbursement from him.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
196	S. 153, that petitioner had no obligation -- even of a temporary nature -- to pay for Matise's return to the United States was correct.	American Foreign Steamship Co. v. Matise, 423 U.S. 150 (1975)	423 U.S. 150 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
200	Supreme Court of the United States December 15, 1975 On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.	U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. ABRAMS, 423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
204	It has always seemed clear to me that the federal courts have plenary power over the admission, disbarment, or discipline of attorneys who practice before them.	U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. ABRAMS, 423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
208	See, e. g., In re Disbarment of Osborne, 420 U.S. 918 (1975); In re Disbarment of Buttles, 419 U.S. 1101 (1975); In re Disbarment of Mades, 414 U.S. 1154 ( 1974).	U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. ABRAMS, 423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
212	U.S. Supreme Court U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. ABRAMS , 423 U.S. 1038 (1975) 423 U.S. 1038 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. Arthur Lawrence ABRAMS.	U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. ABRAMS, 423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
216	The Court of Appeals has advanced the novel doctrine that when the federal court acts on a record made in state disciplinary proceedings the federal court's power to discipline a member of its bar in circumscribed by the scope of the penalty imposed by the state courts.	U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. ABRAMS, 423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
220	A federal court may well determine that conduct found tolerable by another jurisdiction merits disbarment in federal court, as our actions disciplining members of this Court's bar implicitly demonstrate.	U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. ABRAMS, 423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
224	Granting that the burdens of our calendar do not permit full review of all we might desire, the issue here seems so Page 423 U.S. 1038 , 1039 clear that we could appropriately grant the writ and reverse the judgment summarily.	U.S. DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY v. ABRAMS, 423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	423 U.S. 1038 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
228	S. 83-85. (c) The obligations in question were fixed and independent of "events after insolvency," and only the precise amount of those obligations awaited future events.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
232	S. 80-86. (a) Nothing on the face of § 191, and no potential difficulty in administering it, require any distinction between liquidated and unliquidated debts for purpose of the statutory priority; the statute's language looks to the time of payment, rather than the time when the assignment is made.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
236	BURGER, C.J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
240	In June, 1966, respondent Emsco Screen and Pipe Company of Texas, Inc., contracted with the United States in three separate contracts to supply to the Navy, the Army, and the Defense Supply Agency certain fabricated items at an aggregate agreed price of $310,296.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
244	The Defense Supply Agency terminated its contract with Emsco on October 19, 1966, for failure to deliver.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
248	Thus, the claims of the private creditors alone exceeded all known corporate assets of the debtor.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
252	That court found the amount owed under the three defaulted contracts to be in excess of $67,000, including interest, and held that § 3466 afforded priority status to them as "debts due to the United States." The Court of Appeals reversed, with one judge dissenting, holding that the claims of the United States were not, at the time of the assignment for creditors, amounts Page 423 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
256	Judge Thornberry dissented; he relied on King v. United States, 379 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
260	S. 423 (1941); Bramwell v. U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 269 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
264	Pauley v. California, 75 F.2d 120, 133 (CA9 1934); People v. Farmers' State Bank, 335 Ill. 617, 167 N.E. 804 (1929); In re Carnegie Trust Co., 206 N.Y. 390, 99 N.E. 1096 (1912); State v. Bank of Maryland, 6 Gill & Johns. 205, 26 Am.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
268	It provided that the "debt due to the United States" for such duties shall be discharged first "in all cases of insolvency, or where any estate in the hands of executors or administrators shall be insufficient to pay all the debts due from the deceased. . . ." § 21, 1 Stat. 42.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
272	Act of Mar. 2, 1799, 1 Stat. 627, 676.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
276	S. 82 mainly a reference to the public good, there is no reason for giving to [the statute] a strict and narrow interpretation." United States v. State Bank of North Carolina, supra at 34 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
280	The same public policy which would secure a priority of payment to the United States in one case applies with equal force to the other; and an omission to provide for such priority in regard to bonds payable in futuro would amount to an abandonment of all claims, except for a pro rata dividend.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
284	S. 83 inconsistency would warrant our finding an implied exception to the operation of so clear a command as that of § 3466." United States v. Emory, 314 U.S. at 314 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
288	The statute's express command is that "debts due the United States shall be first satisfied"; its language looks to the time of payment, rather than the moment at which the assignment of obligations is made.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
292	Second, respondent Moore urges and the Court of Appeals held that the words "debts due to the United States" must be read to mean only those obligations that would, on the date of the assignment, have given rise to a common law action for debt.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
296	S. 253 (1923); United States v. Emory, supra at 314 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
300	The Acts of 1841 and 1867 contained similar provisions. [Footnote 3] The current Bankruptcy Page 423 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
304	See, e.g., King v. United States, 379 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
308	S. 627 (1948), to the effect that "obligations wholly contingent for ultimate maturity and obligation upon the happening of events after insolvency" are not "debts due." But the obligation here, and in the cases cited, was fixed and independent of "events after insolvency"; only the precise amount of that obligation awaited future events. [Footnote 5] Page 423 U.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
312	A practice so long and so general, would, of itself, furnish strong grounds for a liberal construction, and could not now be disturbed without introducing a train of serious mischiefs.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
316	And the Court rested its decision upon more than just this phrase.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
320	Permitting post-insolvency election would mean that the priority statute applied to contingent obligations, the Court reasoned, and that result would be anomalous.	United States v. Moore, 423 U.S. 77 (1975)	423 U.S. 77 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
324	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION et al. No. 75-432.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
328	This case presents the question whether a private hospital largely funded by the state and federal govern- Page 423 U.S. 1000 , 1001 ments, partly controlled by the state government and the policymaking body of which is chosen by members of the community may, consistent with the Constitution, refuse to perform elective abortions.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Issue	null	null	null
332	The hospital and the land under it were owned by Orange County.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
336	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION et al. No. 75-432.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
340	This case presents the question whether a private hospital largely funded by the state and federal govern- Page 423 U.S. 1000 , 1001 ments, partly controlled by the state government and the policymaking body of which is chosen by members of the community may, consistent with the Constitution, refuse to perform elective abortions.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Issue	null	null	null
344	The hospital and the land under it were owned by Orange County.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
348	The lease specifically indicates that the Corporation 'has undertaken to relieve [the County] of the responsibility and expense of operating a hospital.' The policy of the hospital is, as a result of the lease to the Corporation, set by the Corporation's Board of Directors which consists of nine members.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
352	Petitioner then brought suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against, inter Page 423 U.S. 1000 , 1003 alia, the Corporation, its Board of Directors, and the County Commissioners of Orange County, Tex., seeking damages and injunctive relief.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
356	Two members of the panel agreed with the District Court and stated that the respondents had not acted in an unconstitutional manner because the 'state' was not responsible for the Board of Directors' decisions.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
360	The foundation agreed to fulfill all duties and responsibilities incident to the maintenance and operation of the hospital and agreed to assume the obligations and agreements that the County governing body had made with the United States in securing Hill-Burton Funds.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
364	The decision in O'Neill conflicts with the decision in this case.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
368	Contra, Watkins v. Mercy Medical Center, 520 F.2d 894 (CA9 1975); Ascherman v. Presbyterian Hospital of Pac.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
372	He stated that the State may properly choose to fund operations by paying for the hospital in which they are performed, without permitting the hospital to be used for any particular type of operation.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
376	Supp. 173 (WD Pa.1974); Doe v. Rampton, 366 F.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Rule/Law/Holding	null	null	null
380	Hathaway v. Worcester City Hospital, 475 F.2d 701 (CA1 1973).	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null
384	However, it would undoubtedly surprise members of the bar and the public that this Court views the conflicts created by the decision below to fall within such a category.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
388	Footnotes Footnote 1 Respondents point out that petitioner ceased his relationship with the hospital after the filing of the instant lawsuit and claim that the case therefore become moot.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Facts	null	null	null
392	The argument was rejected by both courts below as being inconsistent with this Court's decision to extend standing to doctors in Doe v. Bolton, supra, at 188-189, who had been plaintiffs below and not defendants in a criminal case.	GRECO v. ORANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CORPORATION, 423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	423 U.S. 1000 (1975)	null	opinion	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Analysis	null	null	null
396	U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Powell, 423 U.S. 87 (1973) United States v. Powell No. 74-884 Argued October 6, 1975 Decided December 2, 1975 423 U.S. 87 Syllabus Respondent was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1715, which proscribes mailing pistols, revolvers, and "other firearms capable of being concealed on the person," by having sent a 22-inch sawed-off shotgun through the mails.	United States v. Powell, 423 U.S. 87 (1975)	423 U.S. 87 (1975)	null	syllabus	Burger Court	1,975	supreme_cases_1975.json	Others	null	null	null

End of preview. Expand in Data Studio

LAMUS: Legal Argument Mining from U.S. Supreme Court

📋 Dataset Description

This dataset contains 2,900,083 sentences from U.S. Supreme Court opinions spanning 1921-2025, automatically labeled with legal argument categories. This is the largest publicly available labeled dataset for legal argument mining from U.S. caselaw.

🎯 Purpose

The dataset enables:

Legal Argument Mining research
Legal Text Classification model training
Temporal Analysis of judicial writing styles
Cross-court Comparison studies

📊 Dataset Statistics

Metric	Value
Total Sentences	2,900,083
Supreme Court Eras	8 (1921-2025)
Label Categories	6
Labeling Model Accuracy	85.16%
File Size	~987 MB

🏛️ Supreme Court Eras Covered

Court Era	Chief Justice	Years	Sentences	% of Dataset
Burger Court	Warren Burger	1969-1986	809,409	27.9%
Rehnquist Court	William Rehnquist	1986-2005	673,564	23.2%
Warren Court	Earl Warren	1953-1969	377,645	13.0%
Roberts Court	John Roberts	2005-2025	362,891	12.5%
Hughes Court	Charles E. Hughes	1930-1941	213,122	7.4%
Vinson Court	Fred Vinson	1946-1953	170,975	5.9%
Taft Court	William H. Taft	1921-1930	155,066	5.3%
Stone Court	Harlan F. Stone	1941-1946	137,411	4.7%

🏷️ Label Categories

Label	Description	Count	Percentage
Analysis	Legal reasoning, interpretation, argumentation	799,921	27.6%
Rule/Law/Holding	Legal rules, statutes, precedents, holdings	799,324	27.6%
Facts	Background details, case history, evidence	763,106	26.3%
Others	Procedural text, citations, headers	354,784	12.2%
Conclusion	Final decisions, judgments, outcomes	123,137	4.2%
Issue	Legal questions being addressed	59,811	2.1%

📁 Dataset Structure

Data Fields

Field	Type	Description
`row_id`	int64	Unique identifier
`sentence`	string	The legal sentence text
`case_title`	string	Name of the case
`citation`	string	Legal citation (e.g., "410 U.S. 113")
`docket_number`	string	Court docket number
`source_field`	string	Part of opinion (syllabus, opinion, etc.)
`court`	string	Supreme Court era
`year`	int64	Year of decision
`source_file`	string	Original source file
`Predicted_Label`	string	ML-predicted argument label
`source`	string	Data source
`date_decided`	string	Decision date
`url`	string	Link to original opinion

Example Entry

{
  "row_id": 0,
  "sentence": "The defendant was convicted of first-degree murder.",
  "case_title": "Smith v. United States",
  "citation": "500 U.S. 123",
  "court": "Rehnquist Court",
  "year": 1991,
  "Predicted_Label": "Facts"
}

🚀 Usage

Loading the Dataset

from datasets import load_dataset

# Load the full dataset
dataset = load_dataset("LavanyaPobbathi/lamus-scotus-legal-arguments")

# Access the data
scotus_data = dataset["scotus_all_courts"]
print(f"Total sentences: {len(scotus_data):,}")

# Example: Filter by court era
burger_court = [s for s in scotus_data if s["court"] == "Burger Court"]

Loading as Pandas DataFrame

import pandas as pd
from datasets import load_dataset

dataset = load_dataset("LavanyaPobbathi/lamus-scotus-legal-arguments")
df = dataset["scotus_all_courts"].to_pandas()

# Analyze label distribution
print(df["Predicted_Label"].value_counts())

Filter by Court Era

# Get only Roberts Court (2005-present)
roberts = df[df["court"] == "Roberts Court"]
print(f"Roberts Court sentences: {len(roberts):,}")

🔬 Methodology

Labeling Model

The sentences were labeled using a fine-tuned Llama-3-8B model with the following specifications:

Parameter	Value
Base Model	Meta-Llama-3-8B-Instruct
Method	QLoRA (4-bit quantization)
Learning Rate	2e-4
LoRA Rank	16
Epochs	3
Test Accuracy	85.16%

Training Data

The model was trained on 2,585 manually annotated sentences from Texas criminal court cases and validated on 647 test sentences.

Validation

Stratified train/test split (80/20)
6-class classification task
Macro F1: 0.69, Weighted F1: 0.80

📈 Key Research Findings

Fine-tuning dramatically outperforms prompting (+9.27% accuracy)
General-domain LLMs outperform legal-specific models (surprising finding)
Few-shot prompting decreases accuracy (important negative result)
Significant domain shift between trial courts (Facts-heavy) and SCOTUS (Rule/Law-heavy)

📚 Related Resources

Training Data: Texas Criminal Cases (available upon request)
Model: Fine-tuned Llama-3-8B (available upon request)
Paper: [Coming Soon - ICAIL 2026]

📖 Citation

If you use this dataset in your research, please cite:

@dataset{lamus2026,
  title={LAMUS: Legal Argument Mining from U.S. Supreme Court Using Large Language Models},
  author={Pobbathi, Lavanya and Wang, Serene and Chen, Haihua},
  year={2026},
  publisher={Hugging Face},
  url={https://huggingface.co/datasets/LavanyaPobbathi/lamus-scotus-legal-arguments}
}

📄 License

This dataset is released under the MIT License.

The underlying Supreme Court opinions are in the public domain as U.S. government works.

👥 Authors

Lavanya Pobbathi - University of North Texas
Serene Wang - University of North Texas
Haihua Chen - University of North Texas (Supervisor)

📧 Contact

For questions or feedback, please open an issue on this dataset repository or contact the authors.

Downloads last month: 22

Size of downloaded dataset files:

987 MB

Size of the auto-converted Parquet files:

331 MB

Number of rows:

2,900,083