TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ellis v. Emery

William S. ELLIS, Jr. v. Richard EMERY, Trustee

Ellis v. Emery, 556 U.S. 1177 (2009)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
April 20, 2009
Docket
No. 08-8906
Citations
556 U.S. 1177129 S. Ct. 2008173 L. Ed. 2d 107977 U.S.L.W. 35762009 U.S. LEXIS 2736
Cited by 6 3 descriptions by later courts

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 3 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

  • (gathering cases and concluding that most jurisdictions have “universally treated the discovery of an arrest warrant as an intervening circumstance”)
    State v. Moralez, 300 P.3d 1090 (Kan. 2013)
  • (contrasting the “fishing expedition” scenario with “a chance discovery of an outstanding arrest warrant in the course of a seizure that is later determined to be invalid”)
    State v. Bailey, 338 P.3d 702 (Or. 2014)

Cited by 6 cases

View all citing references →
2012: 22013: 12014: 22019: 120122026peak 2012 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Commonwealth v. Rodriguez122 N.E.3d 1066 (Mass. 2019)
  2. State v. Shaw64 A.3d 499 (N.J. 2012)
  3. State v. Moralez300 P.3d 1090 (Kan. 2013)
  4. State v. Bailey338 P.3d 702 (Or. 2014)
  5. State v. Strieff2012 UT App 245, 286 P.3d 317
  6. State v. BaileyNo. S061647 (Or. Nov. 6, 2014)

Most recent

  1. Commonwealth v. Rodriguez122 N.E.3d 1066 (Mass. 2019)
  2. State v. Bailey338 P.3d 702 (Or. 2014)
  3. State v. BaileyNo. S061647 (Or. Nov. 6, 2014)
  4. State v. Moralez300 P.3d 1090 (Kan. 2013)
  5. State v. Shaw64 A.3d 499 (N.J. 2012)
  6. State v. Strieff2012 UT App 245, 286 P.3d 317

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list