United States v. 350 Chests of Tea

How courts have described this case

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

• “the ‘in-custody’ language does not require that a prisoner be physically confined in order to challenge his sentence on habeas corpus.”
• federal courts sitting in diversity must apply the preclusion law “that would be applied by state courts in the State in which the federal diversity court sits.”
• federal courts sitting in diversity must apply the preclusion law “that would be applied by state courts in the State in which the federal diversity court sits.”
• federal courts sitting in diversity must apply the preclusion law “that would be applied by state courts in the State in which the federal diversity court sits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).