Great Northern Railway Co. v. Sunburst Oil & Refining Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that States enjoy some freedom in determining retroactive application of rules based on State law
• rejecting a due process attack upon the solely prospective application of a state court decision in a civil case
• “We think the federal constitution has no voice upon the subject [of whether a state court may decline to give its decisions retroactive effect]”
• \We think the federal constitution has no voice upon the subject [of whether a state court may decline to give its decisions retroactive effect]\
• \the federal constitution has no voice upon the subject [of refusal to make new statutory interpretation retroactive]\
• “the federal constitution has no voice upon the subject [of refusal to make new statutory interpretation retroactive]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).