Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
First Circuit· 12/16/1997

Adelson v. DiPaola

Citations

  • 131 F.3d 259
  • 1997 WL 757580

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that' “mere incantation of constitutional buzzwords, unaccompanied by any federal constitutional analysis, does not suffice to carry the burden of demonstrating fair presentment of a .federal claim”
  • observing that “our de novo appellate review of a district court’s dismissal of a habeas petition for want of exhaustion is necessarily case-specific”
  • ruling that petitioner did not exhaust a due process claim when he had not premised either his Appeals Court or Supreme Judicial Court appeal on federal constitutional grounds or cited any federal cases, relying solely on Massachusetts case law
  • holding petitioner did not exhaust his remedies because he “relied only upon [state] case law and debated the assignment of error exclusively in state-law terms”
  • noting that the petitioner must present the federal claim to the Supreme Judicial Court within “the four corners” of the ALOFAR
  • holding due process claim not exhausted where petitioner cited no federal cases, constitutional provisions, or state cases analyzing federal law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Selya, Aldrich, Boudin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

59 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Adelson v. DiPaola

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.