Walitwarangkul v. United States

Walitwarangkul v. United States, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987)

Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Decided: April 20, 1987
Docket: No. 86-6539
Citations: 481 U.S. 1023107 S. Ct. 190995 L. Ed. 2d 51555 U.S.L.W. 37131987 U.S. LEXIS 1765

Cited by 32 3 descriptions by later courts

Opinion of the Court

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

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

How later courts describe this case

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

(declining to apply doctrine when unraised by parties)

United States v. Rigdon, 874 F.2d 774 (11th Cir. 1989)
(cases applying abstention in other federal contexts)

Lozano v. Swift Energy Co. (In re Wright), 231 B.R. 597 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 1999)
(declining to follow Johnson on this basis)

Foulke BY Foulke v. Foulke, 896 F. Supp. 158 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)

Cited by 32 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Alleghany Corp. v. Haase708 F. Supp. 1507 (W.D. Wis. 1989)
New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. Council of New Orleans833 F.2d 583 (5th Cir. 1987)
New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. The Council Of The City Of New Orleans833 F.2d 583 (5th Cir. 1988)
New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. The Council of the City of New Orleans850 F.2d 1069 (5th Cir. 1988)
Cigna Healthplan of Louisiana, Inc. v. Louisiana ex rel. Ieyoub883 F. Supp. 94 (M.D. La. 1995)
Arkansas Power & Light Co. v. Missouri Public Service Commission829 F.2d 1444 (8th Cir. 1987)

Most recent

Occidental Chemical Corp. v. Louisiana Public Service Commission494 F. Supp. 2d 401 (M.D. La. 2007)
Monongahela Power Co. v. Schriber322 F. Supp. 2d 902 (S.D. Ohio 2004)
Lozano v. Swift Energy Co. (In re Wright)231 B.R. 597 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 1999)
Public Service Co. of New Hampshire v. Patch167 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 1998)
Public Service Co. of New Hampshire v. Patch167 F.3d 15 (1st Cir. 1998)
United States v. Gary Lefkowitz125 F.3d 608 (8th Cir. 1998)

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.

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list