The document appears to be pages from a legal publication or database containing information about court cases. It discusses legal precedents and protections for the text of court judgments. However, as the document only contains front matter and no substantive legal analysis or reasoning from a case, it does not provide enough context to summarize in 3 sentences or less beyond stating it relates to legal precedents and protections for text of court rulings.
The document appears to be pages from a legal publication or database containing information about court cases. It discusses legal precedents and protections for the text of court judgments. However, as the document only contains front matter and no substantive legal analysis or reasoning from a case, it does not provide enough context to summarize in 3 sentences or less beyond stating it relates to legal precedents and protections for text of court rulings.
The document appears to be pages from a legal publication or database containing information about court cases. It discusses legal precedents and protections for the text of court judgments. However, as the document only contains front matter and no substantive legal analysis or reasoning from a case, it does not provide enough context to summarize in 3 sentences or less beyond stating it relates to legal precedents and protections for text of court rulings.
United States v. Frank Viserto, JR., Richard Rocco, Joseph Solce, Garnet Johnson, Sarah Payne, Howard Williams and Prentiss Covington, 596 F.2d 531, 2d Cir. (1979)