Boca Ratone Co. v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a rule can be a significant change, under RCW 10.73.100(6), without also being a new rule for purposes of Teague
• explaining that the “plain language” of Washington’s immigration-advisement statute establishes an “unequivocal” right to immigration advice
• explaining that a rule can be a significant change, under RCW 10.73.100(6), without also being a new rule for purposes of Teague
• explaining a rule is not new under Teague where it clarifies a step of the existing Batson analysis
• examining whether two petitioners' PRP claims fit within the RCW 10.73.100 exception to 10.73.090's one-year time bar first, for both the petitioner whose claim did survive and also the petitioner whose claim did not survive
• examining whether two petitioners’ PRP claims fit within the RCW 10.73.100 exception to the one-year time bar, for both the petitioner whose claim did survive and also the petitioner whose claim did not survive

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).