| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Lurk v. United States ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Glidden Co. v. Zdanok
''Glidden Co. v. Zdanok'' (consolidated with ''Lurk v. United States''), , is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that judges of the Court of Claims and the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals were judges created under Article III of the Constitution (also known as ''Article III judges''). As such, it was permissible for the Chief Justice of the United States under 28 U.S.C. § 293(a) to designate judges from the Court of Claims and the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals to serve on district courts and courts of appeals.〔''Glidden Co. v. Zdanok'', .〕
== Background ==
In Ex parte Bakelite Corp., , and Williams v. United States, , the Court held that the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and the United States Court of Claims were courts created under Article I of the Constitution. However, the U.S. Congress in 67 Stat. 226 (1953) and 72 Stat. 848 (1958), had indicated that the two courts were constituted under Article III of the Constitution. This distinction was important as judges of Article III courts are considered part of the independent judiciary as they are appointed for life and their salary cannot be decreased, which is in turn considered a requirement for the operation of judiciary as a separate branch of government. In the two cases at hand, judges from these courts had been assigned to courts of appeals and districts court by the Chief Justice of the United States as part of the task of balancing the workloads among the various courts. It was contended that these judges were judges of Article I courts and therefore could not adjudicate decisions on Article III courts. It was contended that as the judgments of the Court of Claims had traditionally required Congressional appropriation to pay prevailing plaintiffs, because the Court of Claims issued advisory reports in response to matters referred to it by Congress under , and because the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals could review certain administrative decisions of the Tariff Commission under , that they there not truly independent as required by Article III.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Glidden Co. v. Zdanok」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|