Supreme Court· 11/9/1976
Tully v. Griffin, Inc.
Citations
- 429 U.S. 68
- 97 S. Ct. 219
- 50 L. Ed. 2d 227
- 1976 U.S. LEXIS 173
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that New York provides sufficient remedies to challenge New York tax schemes
- stating that “New York courts have consistently held that ... a declaratory judgment! ] may be used when the claim is that the tax is unconstitutional”
- reaffirming the principal that summary orders should not be given full precedential weight
- reaffirming the principal that summary orders should not be given full precedential weight
- recognition of state procedures for challenging state tax decisions as reason for federal courts to abstain from granting injunction
- Supreme Court approved New York tax adjustment remedy of declaratory suit during pendency of which tax assessment of the state need not be accepted by taxpayer
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Stewart
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
180 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court· 1984-09-18· cited 4,763×
- Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San DiegoSupreme Court· 1981-07-02· cited 1,213×
- Fair Assessment in Real Estate Assn., Inc. v. McNarySupreme Court· 1981-12-01· cited 712×
- Hibbs v. WinnSupreme Court· 2004-06-14· cited 703×
- Washington v. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian ReservationSupreme Court· 1980-08-11· cited 702×
- Trainor v. HernandezSupreme Court· 1977-05-31· cited 606×
- Rosewell v. LaSalle National BankSupreme Court· 1981-05-18· cited 532×
- California v. Grace Brethren ChurchSupreme Court· 1982-06-18· cited 522×
- Department of Revenue of Ore. v. ACF Industries, Inc.Supreme Court· 1994-01-24· cited 313×
- Edward Ashton v. Kenneth CoryNinth Circuit· 1986-01-16· cited 307×
- Two Twenty East Ltd. Partnership v. New York State Department of Taxation & FinanceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1992-07-23· cited 230×
- Trailer Marine Transport Corp. v. Carmen M. Rivera Vazquez, Etc.First Circuit· 1992-10-28· cited 160×
- Tyler Pipe Industries, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court· 1982-01-14· cited 122×
- Bishop v. SmithTenth Circuit· 2014-07-18· cited 114×
- ANR Pipeline Co. v. LafaverTenth Circuit· 1998-07-21· cited 110×
- Colonial Pipeline Company, and Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Marcus E. Collins, Sr.Eleventh Circuit· 1991-01-22· cited 105×
- United States v. KingE.D. New York· 1976-12-29· cited 76×
- Coors Brewing Co. v. Méndez-TorresFirst Circuit· 2009-03-30· cited 64×
- Direct Marketing Assn. v. BrohlSupreme Court· 2015-03-03· cited 63×
- Scott Air Force Base Properties, LLC v. COUNTY, ST. CLAIR, ILL.Seventh Circuit· 2008-11-14· cited 59×
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court· 1974-05-13· cited 6,517×
- Bishop v. WoodSupreme Court· 1976-06-10· cited 2,973×
- Hicks v. MirandaSupreme Court· 1975-06-24· cited 1,202×
- Moe v. Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead ReservationSupreme Court· 1976-04-27· cited 703×
- Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. HuffmanSupreme Court· 1943-05-24· cited 645×
- Matthews v. RodgersSupreme Court· 1932-02-15· cited 474×
- Township of Hillsborough v. CromwellSupreme Court· 1946-01-28· cited 371×
- Huddleston v. DwyerSupreme Court· 1944-06-12· cited 180×
- First National City Bank v. City of New York Finance AdministrationNew York Court of Appeals· 1975-02-17· cited 89×
- Slater v. GallmanNew York Court of Appeals· 1975-11-20· cited 48×
- Public Service Commission v. NortonNew York Court of Appeals· 1952-12-05· cited 18×
- Stacy v. StateNew York Supreme Court· 1975-06-03· cited 5×
- Ammex Warehouse Co. v. GallmanSupreme Court· 1973-10-09· cited 3×
- Griffin, Inc. v. TullyD. Vermont· 1976-02-23· cited 2×
Other cases named Tully v. Griffin, Inc.
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.