ADAMS
v.
MERCK & CO., INC.; ALBAHRI V. FLORIDA; MBAKPOU V. COMMITTEE ON ADMISSIONS, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

U.S. | 2011-06-13
Nos. 10-9938; No. 10-10051; No. 10-10150
564 U.S. 1003 Supreme Court of the United States (2011) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134 (U.S. 2012)
    …he Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to adjudicate Gonzalez’s appeal, notwithstanding the § 2253(c)(3) defect;1 and (2) whether Gonzalez’s habeas petition was time [*140] barred under § 2244(d)(1) due to the date on which his judgment became final.2 564 U. S. 1003 (2011). II We first consider whether the Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to adjudicate Gonzalez’s appeal. A Section 2253, as amended by AEDPA, governs appeals in habeas corpus proceedings. The first subsection, § 2253(a), is a general grant of…
  • Hall et ux. v. United States, 566 U.S. 506 (U.S. 2012)
    …§ 1222(a) (2)(A) exception. Judge Paez dissented, siding with a sister Circuit that had concluded that Congress intended § 1222(a)(2)(A) to extend to such postpetition federal income taxes. We granted certiorari to resolve the split of authority.1 564 U. S. 1003 (2011). II A Our resolution of this case turns on the meaning of a phrase in § 503(b) of the Bankruptcy Code: “incurred by the estate.” The parties agree that § 1222(a)(2)(A) applies only to priority claims collectible in the bankruptcy plan and…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw