SCOTUS· 3/17/1941
Hormel v. Helvering
Citations
- 312 U.S. 552
- 61 S. Ct. 719
- 85 L. Ed. 1037
- 1941 U.S. LEXIS 1257
- 24 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 838
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting an efficiency rationale for addressing waived issues where intervening case authority might change the result
- noting an efficiency rationale for addressing waived issues where intervening case authority might change the result
- “[The exhaustion doctrine] should not be applied where the obvious result would be a plain miscarriage of justice.”
- “Orderly rules of procedure do not require sacrifice of the rules of fundamental justice.”
- same principle applicable to review of administrative agencies
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Black
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.