USCHAG Corp. v. Flagstar Bank, FSB

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Caldwell announced a new rule as defined by Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 109 S.Ct. 1060, 103 L.Ed.2d 334 (1989)
• concluding that Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320, 105 S.Ct. 2633, 86 L.Ed.2d 231 (1985), announced a new rule, in part based on the views of the Caldwell dissenters
• holding that for exception to apply, procedure “must not only improve accuracy, but also alter our understanding of the bedrock procedural elements essential to the fairness of the proceeding.”
• holding that rule which “provided] an additional measure of protection” to existing prohibition on prosecutorial remarks that render a proceeding “fundamentally unfair” was not “an ‘absolute prerequisite to fundamental fairness’ ” that would fall within the second Teague exception
• observing that “[t]he Caldwell rule was . .. added to [Donnelly’s] existing guarantee of due process protection against fundamental unfairness”
• observing that \[t]he Caldwell rule was . . . added to [ Donnelly `s] existing guarantee of due process protection against fundamental unfairness\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).