Burnap v. United States

Last updated
Burnap v. United States
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued March 12, 1920
Decided April 19, 1920
Full case nameBurnap v. United States
Citations252 U.S. 512 ( more )
Holding
Whether a person is an officer of the United States or a mere employee is determined by the manner in which Congress has provided by law for the creation of the position, its duties, and the method of appointment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Edward D. White
Associate Justices
Joseph McKenna  · Oliver W. Holmes Jr.
William R. Day  · Willis Van Devanter
Mahlon Pitney  · James C. McReynolds
Louis Brandeis  · John H. Clarke
Case opinion
MajorityBrandeis, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. II, § 2, cl. 2

Burnap v. United States, 252 U.S. 512 (1920), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court concerning the Appointments Clause.

Related Research Articles

Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416 (1920) is a United States Supreme Court case concerning the extent to which international legal obligations are incorporated into federal law under the United States Constitution.

<i>In re Aimster Copyright Litigation</i>

In re Aimster Copyright Litigation, 334 F.3d 643, was a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit addressed copyright infringement claims brought against Aimster, concluding that a preliminary injunction against the file-sharing service was appropriate because the copyright owners were likely to prevail on their claims of contributory infringement, and that the services could have non-infringing users was insufficient reason to reverse the district court's decision. The appellate court also noted that the defendant could have limited the quantity of the infringements if it had eliminated an encryption system feature, and if it had monitored the use of its systems. This made it so that the defense did not fall within the safe harbor of 17 U.S.C. § 512(i). and could not be used as an excuse to not know about the infringement. In addition, the court decided that the harm done to the plaintiff was irreparable and outweighed any harm to the defendant created by the injunction.

United Mine Workers of America v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821 (1994), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court laid out the constitutional limitations for the use of contempt powers by courts.

Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of a school district created with boundaries that matched that of a religious community – in this case, the Satmar community of Kiryas Joel, New York. The case was argued by Nathan Lewin on behalf of Kiryas Joel, Julie Mereson on behalf of the State of New York, and Jay Worona on behalf of the respondents.

Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426 (1955), was an important income tax case before the United States Supreme Court. The Court held as follows:

Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994), more commonly Dolan v. Tigard, is a United States Supreme Court case. It is a landmark case regarding the practice of zoning and property rights, and has served to establish limits on the ability of cities and other government agencies to use zoning and land-use regulations to compel property owners to make unrelated public improvements as a condition to getting zoning approval, citing the violation of the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause.

Turner Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission, 512 U.S. 622 (1994), is the first of two United States Supreme Court cases dealing with the must-carry rules imposed on cable television companies. Turner Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission (II), 520 U.S. 180 (1997) was the second. Turner I established that cable television companies were indeed First Amendment speakers but didn't decide whether the federal regulation of their speech infringed upon their speech rights. In Turner II the court decided that the must-carry provisions were constitutional.

Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (1920), was a U.S. Supreme Court Case in which Silverthorne attempted to evade paying taxes. Federal agents illegally seized tax books from Silverthorne and created copies of the records. The issue in this case is whether or not derivatives of illegal evidence are permissible in court. The ruling, delivered by Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., was that to permit derivatives would encourage police to circumvent the Fourth Amendment, so the illegal copied evidence was held tainted and inadmissible. This precedent later became known as the "fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine," and is an extension of the exclusionary rule.

Geer v. Connecticut, 161 U.S. 519 (1896), was a United States Supreme Court decision, which dealt with the transportation of wild fowl over state lines. Geer held that the states owned the wild animals within their borders and could strictly regulate their management and harvest. According to the Geer Court, "the right to preserve game flows from the undoubted existence in the State of a police power." Although this statement is often quoted by state advocates, it is followed by the qualification that this power reaches only "in so far as its exercise may not be incompatible with, or restrained by, the rights conveyed to the Federal government by the Constitution." The Geer decision supported the view that the states owned all resident wildlife, but at the time there were no conflicting federal wildlife laws.

Honda Motor Company v. Oberg, 512 U.S. 415 (1994), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an amendment to the Oregon state constitution disallowing judicial review of the size of punitive damages was a violation of due process.

Edgington is an unincorporated community in Rock Island County, Illinois, United States. Edgington is located on Illinois Route 192, 4 miles (6.4 km) southwest of Andalusia.

City of Ladue v. Gilleo, 512 U.S. 43 (1994), was a free speech decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. It was a case challenging the legality of a city ordinance restricting the placement of signs in the yards of residents of Ladue, Missouri.

United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252 (1982), was a United States Supreme Court case establishing precedent regarding the limits of free exercise of religious conscience by employers.

George Washington Burnap was a Unitarian clergyman of the United States.

Manners v. Morosco, 252 U.S. 317 (1920), was a United States Supreme Court case with two principal holdings. First, the copyright transfer contract in question was not limited to five years because the agreement dealt in minimum requirements. Secondly, the transfer of the copyright for the production of a play on stage did not grant the ability to make a motion picture based on the play. However, a grant of exclusivity implies a negative guarantee that the original creator will not do anything that may adversely affect that exclusivity, meaning the author forfeited their own ability to authorize a motion picture production. The Court enjoined both parties from making a film version.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Andrew Burnap</span> American actor

Andrew Burnap is an American actor. Known for his performances on stage, he starred in the Public Theatre's revivals of King Lear in 2014 and Troilus and Cressida in 2016. He gained prominence for his role as Toby Darling in the Matthew Lopez play The Inheritance, which premiered on the West End and transferred to Broadway, which earned him the Tony Award for Best Actor in a Play. In 2023 he portrayed King Arthur in the Broadway revival of the Lerner and Loewe musical Camelot.

Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority v. Citizens for Abatement of Aircraft Noise, Inc., 501 U.S. 252 (1991), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States on the United States Constitution's separation of powers doctrine. The Court declared Congress may not vest executive power into agents subject to Congress's control.

References