BROWN
v.
BROWN & ROOT U. S. A. INC. ET AL.; PARIS V. STATE DIVISION OF CORRECTION ET AL.; ADAMS V. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY; WHITAKER V. PETERSON ET AL.; WHITAKER V. PASCARELLA ET AL.; SEN GUPTA V. METCO, INC.; SISCO V. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL.; MINGLEDOLPH V. MCKEAN ET AL.
BROWN
BROWN & ROOT U. S. A. INC. ET AL.; PARIS V. STATE DIVISION OF CORRECTION ET AL.; ADAMS V. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY; WHITAKER V. PETERSON ET AL.; WHITAKER V. PASCARELLA ET AL.; SEN GUPTA V. METCO, INC.; SISCO V. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL.; MINGLEDOLPH V. MCKEAN ET AL.
486 U.S. 1062
Supreme Court of the United States (1988)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Kabeiseman, 970 F.2d 739 (10th Cir. 1992)…s imposing a tax on LAAW, not the United States. The United States and Wyoming are, however, apparently in accord with the following language from South Carolina v. Baker, 485 U.S. 505, 523, 108 S.Ct. 1355, 1366, 99 L.Ed.2d 592 (1988), reh’g denied, 486 U.S. 1062, 108 S.Ct. 2837, 100 L.Ed.2d 937 (1988), which serves as a good starting point: In sum, then, under current intergovernmental tax immunity doctrine the States can never tax the United States directly but can tax any private parties with whom it doe…1 / 2