Question: Which case was settled in court first Eisenstadt v. Baird or Baze v. Rees ?

Context paragraphs:
Cheff v. Mathes: Cheff v. Mathes, 199 A.2d 548 (Del. 1964) was a case in which the Delaware Supreme Court first addressed the issue of director conflict of interest in a corporate change of control setting.  This case is the predecessor to future seminal corporate law cases including: "Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co.", "Revlon v. MacAndrews", and "Paramount v. Time".

WN Hillas &amp; Co Ltd v Arcos Ltd: WN Hillas & Co Ltd v Arcos Ltd [1932] UKHL 2 is a landmark House of Lords case on English contract law where the court first began to move away from a strict, literal interpretation of the terms of a contract, and instead interpreted it with a view to preserve the bargain.  The Court ruled that judges may imply terms into a contract based on the past dealings of the parties rather than void the agreement.

Van Staphorst v. Maryland: Van Staphorst v. Maryland, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.)  401 (1791), was the first case docketed with the United States Supreme Court.  Although the court agreed to hear and decide the case, the suit was settled before oral arguments. " Collet v. Collet" was the first appellate case docketed with the court. " West v. Barnes" was the first case decided by the court.

Baze v. Rees: Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35 (2008) , is a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which upheld the constitutionality of a particular method of lethal injection used for capital punishment.

Gasser v MISAT: Gasser v MISAT (C-116/02) was a decision of the European Court of Justice regarding the interpretation of the Brussels convention of 1968 ruling that a court chosen in a choice of court agreement should stay its proceedings - as any other court chosen second within the Brussels regime - until the court first seized had declared it did not have jurisdiction.  The court's decision was considered problematic as it favoured the uniformity of application of the Brussels regime jurisdictional rules temporarily over party autonomy.  Due to similar provisions in the 2001 Brussels Regulation and Lugano Conventions, the interpretation also affects choice of court agreements under those later instruments.  However, in the 2012 Recast version of the Brussels I Regulation chosen courts can take jurisdiction, even if a court not chosen has been addressed first.

Jones v. Cunningham: Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236 (1963) was a Supreme Court case in which the court first ruled that state inmates had the right to file a writ of habeas corpus challenging both the legality and the conditions of their imprisonment.  Prior to this, starting with "Pervear v. Massachusetts", 72 U.S. 475 (1866) , the court had maintained a "hands off" policy regarding federal interference with state incarceration policies and practices, maintaining that the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states.  Subsequently, in "Cooper v. Pate" (1964), an inmate successfully obtained standing to challenge the denial of his right to practice his religion through a habeas corpus writ.

Eisenstadt v. Baird: Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972) , is a United States Supreme Court case that established the right of unmarried people to possess contraception on the same basis as married couples.

West v. Barnes: West v. Barnes, 2 U.S. 401 (1791), was the first United States Supreme Court decision and the earliest case calling for oral argument. " Van Staphorst v. Maryland" (1791) was docketed prior to "West v. Barnes" but settled before the Court heard the case: "West" was argued on August 2, 1791 and decided on August 3, 1791. " Collet v. Collet" (1791) was the first appellate case docketed with the Court but was dropped before it could be heard.  Supreme Court Reporter Alexander Dallas did not publish the justices' full opinions in "West v. Barnes", which were published in various newspapers around the country at the time, but he published an abbreviated summary of the decisions.

Ralph Baze: Ralph Baze (born July 1, 1955) is a convicted murderer who sued the Kentucky State Department of Corrections along with fellow inmate Thomas Clyde Bowling Jr. to challenge their impending execution.  He and Bowling sued on the grounds that execution by lethal injection using the "cocktail" prescribed by Kentucky law constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the 8th Amendment.  Baze's court case was "Baze v. Rees".

Adams v. Burke: Adams v. Burke, 84 U.S. (17 Wall.)  453 (1873), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court first elaborated on the exhaustion doctrine.  According to that doctrine, a so-called authorized sale of a patented product (one made by the patentee or a person authorized by it to sell the product) liberates the product from the patent monopoly.  The product becomes the complete property of the purchaser and "passes without the monopoly."  The property owner is then free to use or dispose of it as it may choose, free of any control by the patentee.  "Adams" is a widely cited, leading case.  A substantially identical doctrine applies in copyright law and is known as the "first sale doctrine".

Supporting paragraphs: Eisenstadt v. Baird Baze v. Rees
Answer: Eisenstadt v. Baird