OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Lorance v. AT&T Technologies Inc/Concurrence Stevens

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Stevens
* Dissenting Opinion Marshall
Justice STEVENS, concurring.
Although I remain convinced that the Court misconstrued Title VII in American Tobacco Co. v. Patterson, 456 U.S. 63, 102 S.Ct. 1534, 71 L.Ed.2d 748 (1982), see id., at 86-90, 102 S.Ct., at 1546-49 (dissenting opinion), and in Delaware State College v. Ricks, 449 U.S. 250, 101 S.Ct. 498, 66 L.Ed.2d 431 (1980), see id., at 265-267, 101 S.Ct., at 508-509 (dissenting opinion), the Court has correctly applied those decisions to the case at hand. And it is the Court's construction of the statute-rather than the views of an individual Justice-that becomes a part of the law. See Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, 480 U.S. 616, 644, 107 S.Ct. 1442, 1458, 94 L.Ed.2d 615 (1987) (STEVENS, J., concurring); Dougherty County Bd., of Education v. White, 439 U.S. 32, 47, 99 S.Ct. 368, 376-77, 58 L.Ed.2d 269 (1978) (STEVENS, J., concurring). Accordingly, I join the Court's opinion.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lorain Journal Company v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
342 U.S. 143
Lorain Journal Company v. United States
Argued: Oct. 17, 1951. --- Decided: Dec 11, 1951
Mr. William E. Leahy, Washington, D.C., for appellants.
Mr. Philip B. Perlman, Sol. Gen., Washington, D.C., for appellee.
Mr. Justice BURTON delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lord! How He Can Love

Jesamine June loved a bone headed coon, Who didn't know nothing at all, Every one said that a man with that head Had the brain of a billiard ball;
Friends tried to tell her, he wasn't the feller To be any lady's beau, But she shook her head then smilingly said There's some things you don't know.
He don't know nothing about theology, can't add two and two, He don't know nothing about psychology, Broke when the rent comes due He don't know nothing about geology, Nor the stars above, He's just plain, ordinary man, But Lord! how he can love.
One great professor who longed to possess her, Kept buzzing around like a bee, His education had no fascination. So she said now listen to me;
You talk of learning, when my heart is yearning For some one to cuddle me so, Tell you no lies then I'm through with wise men Bring back my Romeo.
He don't know nothing about theology, can't add two and two, He don't know nothing about psychology, Broke when the rent comes due He don't know nothing about geology, Nor the stars above, He's just plain, ordinary man, But Lord! how he can love.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1978, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 45 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lord! have mercy upon us

The hymn Hospodine pomiluj ny is the oldest known Czech song. It's alleged author is Adalbert of Prague.
English-language translations of Hospodine, pomiluj ny include:
# Men-at-the-Bar/Green, Edward George

​Green, Edward George, a student of the Middle Temple 9 April, 1874, called to the bar 25 April, 1877 (eldest son of Genl. Thomas Lyttleton Green, of Aston Hall, Salop); born , .
    Aston Hall, Aston-on-Clun.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Green, Frederick Thomas

​Green, Frederick Thomas, B.A. New Coll., Oxon, an inspector of schools since 1880, goes the Oxford circuit, a student of the Inner Temple 14 March, 1874 (then aged 22), called to the bar 25 April, 1877 (eldest son of Rev. Frederick Septimus Green, of the Roveries, Lydham, Salop); born , 1852.
    53. Coleshill Street, Eaton Square. S.W.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Green, William Hatfield

​Green, William Hatfield, M.A., St. John's Coll., Camb., 1870, equity draftsman and conveyancer, a student of Lincoln's Inn 23 Jan., 1868 (then aged 24), called to the bar 6 June, 1871 (eldest son of John Green, of Sheffield, iron merchant); born , 1842.
    2, New Square, Lincoln's Inn, W.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Green, Samuel

​Green, Samuel, M.A., Sidney Sussex Coll., Camb., 1856, equity draftsman and conveyancer, a student of the Inner Temple 12 Jan., 1863 (then aged 32), called to the bar 30 April, 1875 (2nd son of late John Green, Esq., of London); born , 1831; married 3 Jan., 1865, Eleanor Julia, dau. of John William Huskisson, Esq., late of the Ceylon civil service.
    4, Chester Place, Regents Park, N.W.; 6, New Court, Carey Street, W.C.; Oxford and Cambridge Club, S.W.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Green, Thomas

​Green, Thomas, a member of the South-eastern circuit, a student of Gray's Inn 13 Jan., 1859, called to the bar 27 Jan., 1862 (2nd son of John Green, of Mortlake, Surrey); born , .
    Mortlake, Surrey.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Green, James Ernest

​Green, James Ernest, B.A., LL.B., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1883, a student of the Inner Temple 16 Nov., 1880 (then aged 20), called to the bar 17 Nov., 1884 (youngest son of William Green, of Kidderminster, co. Worc., J.P.); born , 1860.
    Kidderminster.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Greene, Herbert Wilson

​Greene, Herbert Wilson, M.A., B.C.L., Pembroke Coll., Oxon, 1882, from Harrow, a member of the South-eastern circuit 1884, joint editor of Broone's Commentaries on the Common Law, a student of the Inner Temple 29 April, 1876 (then aged 19), called to the bar 11 May, 1881 (eldest son of Thomas Greene, of Dublin); born 15 April, 1857; unmarried.
    2, Old Serjeants' Inn, Chancery Lane, W.C.; 3, Essex Court, Temple, E.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Green, George Sangster

​Green, George Sangster, equity draftsman and conveyancer, a student of Lincoln's Inn 10 Nov., 1866 (then aged 24), exhibition May, 1868, called to the bar 26 Jan., 1869 (2nd son of Isaac Green, late of Upper Tulse Hill, Surrey, gentleman, dec.); born , 1842; married 21 Oct., 1874, Caroline, youngest dau. of Henry Charles Newton, of South Hampstead.
    26, Fitzjohn's Avenue, Hampstead; 2, Old Buildings, W.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Green, James Samuel

​Green, James Samuel, B.A., Pembroke Coll., Oxon, 1883, a student of Lincoln's Inn 16 Jan., 1882 (then aged 21), Lincoln's Inn scholarship international and constitutional law 1884, called to the bar 29 April, 1885 (only son of James Richard Goring-Green, of London); born , 1861.
    91, Oxford Terrace, Sussex Gardens, W.; 24, Old Square, Lincoln's Inn, W.C.
# Men-at-the-Bar/Greene, Henry David

​Greene, Henry David, LL.M., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1871, M.A. 1868, goes the Oxford circuit, a student of the Middle Temple 14 April, 1863, called to the bar 27 Jan., 1868 (3rd son of Benjamin Buck Greene, Esq., of Midgham, Berks, ex-governor Bank of England); born , .
    Midgham, Reading; 7, Durham Villas, Kensington Gardens, W.; 4, Brick Court, Temple, E.C.
# Lonergan v. United States (304 U.S. 581)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
304 U.S. 581
Lonergan v. United States
Mr. Pierce Lonergan, of Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lonergan v. United States (304 U.S. 581)/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
304 U.S. 581
Lonergan v. United States
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
For opinion below, see 95 F.2d 642.
The motion for leave to proceed further herein in forma pauperis is denied for the reason that the Court, upon examination of the papers herein submitted, finds no ground upon which writs of certiorari should be issued. The petition for writ of certiorari is therefore also denied.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lonesome (song)
## Film appearances

* "Lonesome" (1928), the original—the closing theme for the film Lonesome

## Records

* Lonesome (1928)—Copyrighted in the United States until 2029, performed by Danny Meyers
# Lonergan v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Lonergan v. United States."
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* Lonergan v. United States (303 U.S. 330
* Lonergan v. United States (304 U.S. 581)
# Lonergan v. United States (303 U.S. 330

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
303 U.S. 33
Lonergan v. United States
Argued: Jan. 10, 1938. --- Decided: Jan 31, 1938
Mr. Pierce Lonergan, of Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Mr. J. Albert Woll, of Washington, D.C., for the United States.
Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lonesome

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Lonesome."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* "Lonesome" (1913, "Mother 's gone a-visitin' to spend a month er two"), a poem by Paul Laurence Dunbar
* Lonesome (1928), a part-talkie comedy-drama film directed by Paul Fejos
   * "Lonesome" (1928), a song originally written as a closing theme for the film

## See also

* Loneliness
* Alone
# Louisiana ex rel. New York Guaranty Indemnity Company v. Steele

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
134 U.S. 230
Louisiana ex rel. New York Guaranty Indemnity Company v. Steele
W. W. Howe and Wm. Allen Butler, for plaintiff in error.
W. H. Rogers and B. J. Sage, for defendant in error.
BRADLEY, J.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Louisiana ex rel. Washington v. Walker

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
370 U.S. 726
STATE OF LOUISIANA ex rel. Steve WASHINGTON v. V. G. WALKER
Robert H. Reiter and Jack N. Rogers, for appellant.
Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen. of Louisiana, and Scallan E. Walsh, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Louisiana ex rel. Washington v. Walker/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
370 U.S. 726
STATE OF LOUISIANA ex rel. Steve WASHINGTON v. V. G. WALKER, WARDEN
No. 900, MISC.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Louisiana ex rel. Stewart v. Jefferson, Left Bank

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
116 U.S. 135
Louisiana ex rel. Stewart v. Jefferson, Left Bank
Argued: December 21, 1885. ---
Charles Louque and B. F. Jonas, for plaintiff in error.
No appearance for defendant in error.
MILLER, J.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Louisiana v. James Rudolph Garfield

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
211 U.S. 70
Louisiana v. James Rudolph Garfield
Argued: October 27, 28, 1908. --- Decided: November 9, 1908
Attornel General Bonaparte, Solicitor General Hoyt, and Mr. Glenn E. Husted for defendants.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 70-72 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Harvey M. Friend, George H. Lamar, and Walter Guion for complainant.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 72-74 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Louisiana v. McAdoo

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
234 U.S. 627
Louisiana v. McAdoo
Argued: April 14, 1914. --- Decided: June 22, 1914
Messrs. Ruffin G. Pleasant, Joseph W. Bailey and Paul J. Christian for petitioner.
Solicitor General Davis and Assistant Attorney General Adkins opposed.
Mr. Justice Lurton delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Lorna Doone/Volume 1/Preface

PREFACE.
This work is called a "romance," because the incidents, characters, time, and scenery, are alike romantic. And in shaping this old tale, the Writer neither dares, nor desires, to claim for it the dignity or cumber it with the difficulty of an historic novel.
And yet he thinks that the outlines are filled in more carefully, and the situations (however simple) more warmly coloured and quickened, than a reader would expect to find in what is called a "legend."
And he knows that any son of Exmoor, chancing on this volume, cannot fail to bring to mind the nurse-tales of his childhood—the savage deeds of the outlaw Doones in the depth of Bagworthy Forest, the beauty of the hapless maid brought up in the midst of them, the plain John Ridd's Herculean power, and (memory's too congenial food) the exploits of Tom Faggus.
# Los Angeles Brush Manufacturing Corporation v. James

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
272 U.S. 701
Los Angeles Brush Manufacturing Corporation v. James
Submitted on Motion for Leave to File Petition for Writ of Mandamus Oct. 25, 1926
Denied Jan. 3, 1927.
Messrs. Ford W. Harris, of Los Angeles, Cal., and Wm. J. Hughes, Jr., of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.
Mr. Chief Justice TAFT delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Los Angeles County v. Rettele/Concurrence Stevens

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Stevens
Justice Stevens, with whom Justice Ginsburg joins, concurring in the judgment.
This case presents two separate questions: (1) whether the four circumstances identified in the Court of Appeals' unpublished opinion established a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the seizure violated respondents’ Fourth Amendment rights, see ante, at 612; (2) whether the officers were nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity because the right was not clearly established. The fact that the judges on the Court of Appeals disagreed on both questions convinces me that they should not have announced their decision in an unpublished opinion.
In answering the first question, the Ninth Circuit majority relied primarily on Franklin v. Foxworth, 31 F.3d 873 (CA9 1994). As Judge Cowen's discussion of Franklin demonstrates, that case surely does not clearly establish the unconstitutionality of the officers' conduct. Consequently, regardless of the proper answer to the constitutional question, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. I would reverse on that ground and disavow the unwise practice of deciding constitutional questions in advance of the necessity for doing so. See County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 859 (1998) (Stevens, J., concurring in judgment). Accordingly, I concur in the Court's judgment.

#### Notes

* 1 2 . See 186 Fed. Appx. 765, 767 (2006) (dissenting opinion) ("In Franklin v. Foxworth, 31 F.3d 873 (9th Cir. 1994), we found unconstitutional the officers' failure to provide clothing to a gravely ill man before exposing his genitals to twenty-three strangers for over two hours, under circumstances where there was no reason why the man was not given clothing. Id. at 876–78. We concluded that the detention was conducted in 'a manner that wantonly and callously subjected an obviously ill and incapacitated person to entirely unnecessary and unjustifiable degradation and suffering.' Id. at 878. Here, in contrast, Plaintiffs were not gravely ill, and their brief exposure, which lasted, at most, three or four minutes, was outweighed by the safety risks associated with allowing two occupants to remain in bed under covers during execution of a search warrant").
# Los Angeles County v. Rettele

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Los Angeles County v. Rettele, 550 U.S. 609 (2007), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures was not violated when officers execute a valid warrant and act in a reasonable manner, even though the individual in the home they searched was engaging in private, non-criminal activity.

## Concurring Opinion

    Stevens
Supreme Court of the United States
550 U.S. 609
Los Angeles County v. Rettele
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
No. 06-605 Argued: --- Decided: May 21, 2007
Respondents filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit, alleging that their Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures was violated when Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department deputies, who were executing a valid warrant to search a house but were unaware that the potentially armed suspects being sought had sold the house to respondents and moved out, ordered the unclothed respondents out of bed and required them to stand for a few minutes before allowing them to dress. The District Court granted the defendants summary judgment. In reversing, the Ninth Circuit found that the deputies violated the Fourth Amendment and were not entitled to qualified immunity because a reasonable deputy would have stopped the search upon discovering that respondents were of a different race than the suspects and would not have ordered respondents from their bed.
Held: The deputies did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Officers executing a search warrant may take reasonable action to secure the premises and to ensure their own safety and the efficacy of the search. Upon encountering respondents, the deputies acted reasonably to secure the premises. The presence of one race did not eliminate the possibility that suspects of a different race were in the residence as well. In ordering respondents out of bed, the deputies acted reasonably to ensure their own safety, since blankets and bedding can conceal a weapon and since one of the suspects was known to own a firearm. There is no allegation that the detention was prolonged or that respondents were prevented from dressing any longer than necessary to protect the deputies' safety.
Certiorari granted; 186 Fed. Appx. 765, reversed and remanded.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Main Street and other poems/Main Street

MAIN STREET
(For S. M. L.)
I LIKE to look at the blossomy track of the moon upon the sea, But it isn't half so fine a sight as Main Street used to be When it all was covered over with a couple of feet of snow, And over the crisp and radiant road the ringing sleighs would go.
Now, Main Street bordered with autumn leaves, it was a pleasant thing, And its gutters were gay with dandelions early in the Spring; I like to think of it white with frost or dusty in the heat, Because I think it is humaner than any other street.
​A city street that is busy and wide is ground by a thousand wheels, And a burden of traffic on its breast is all it ever feels: It is dully conscious of weight and speed and of work that never ends, But it cannot be human like Main Street, and recognise its friends.
There were only about a hundred teams on Main Street in a day, And twenty or thirty people, I guess, and some children out to play. And there wasn't a wagon or buggy, or a man or a girl or a boy That Main Street didn't remember, and somehow seem to enjoy.
The truck and the motor and trolley car and the elevated train They make the weary city street reverberate with pain: ​But there is yet an echo left deep down within my heart Of the music the Main Street cobblestones made beneath a butcher's cart.
God be thanked for the Milky Way that runs across the sky, That's the path that my feet would tread whenever I have to die. Some folks call it a Silver Sword, and some a Pearly Crown, But the only thing I think it is, is Main Street, Heaventown.
# Main Street and other poems/Multiplication

MULTIPLICATION
(For S. M. E.)
I TAKE my leave, with sorrow, of Him I love so well; I look my last upon His small and radiant prison-cell; O happy lamp! to serve Him with never ceasing light! O happy flame! to tremble forever in His sight!
I leave the holy quiet for the loudly human train, And my heart that He has breathed upon is filled with lonely pain. O King, O Friend, O Lover! What sorer grief can be In all the reddest depths of Hell than banishment from Thee?
But from my window as I speed across the sleeping land I see the towns and villages wherein His houses stand. ​Above the roofs I see a cross outlined against the night, And I know that there my Lover dwells in His sacramental might.
Dominions kneel before Him, and Powers kiss His feet, Yet for me He keeps His weary watch in the turmoil of the street: The King of Kings awaits me, wherever I may go, O who am I that He should deign to love and serve me so?
# Main Street and other poems/Queen Elizabeth Speaks

QUEEN ELIZABETH SPEAKS
MY hands were stained with blood, my heart was proud and cold, My soul is black with shame ... but I gave Shakespeare gold. So after æons of flame, I may, by grace of God, Rise up to kiss the dust that Shakespeare's feet have trod.
# Main Street and other poems/The Annunciation

THE ANNUNCIATION
(For Helen Parry Eden)
HAIL Mary, full of grace," the Angel saith. Our Lady bows her head, and is ashamed; She has a Bridegroom Who may not be named, Her mortal flesh bears Him Who conquers death. Now in the dust her spirit grovelleth; Too bright a Sun before her eyes has flamed, Too fair a herald joy too high proclaimed, And human lips have trembled in God's breath.
O Mother-Maid, thou art ashamed to cover With thy white self, whereon no stain can be, Thy God, Who came from Heaven to be thy Lover, Thy God, Who came from Heaven to dwell in thee. About thy head celestial legions hover, Chanting the praise of thy humility.