green
Positive treatment
3.1 score
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Attorney General of Canada v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc.
In part, the reluctance of courts to delve into such matters is based on the “desire to avoid embarrassing another state by scrutinizing its penal and revenue laws.” Sabbatino, 376 U.S. at 437 , 84 S.Ct. 923 ; see United States v. Boots, 80 F.3d 580, 587 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 905 , 117 S.Ct. 263 , 136 L.Ed.2d 188 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Estados Unidos Mexicanos v. DeCoster
See United States v. Boots, 80 F.3d 580, 587-88 (1st Cir.) (reciting dangers of this country’s penal enforcement of other countries’ customs and tax laws without reciprocal enforcement of American laws), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 905 , 117 S.Ct. 263 , 136 L.Ed.2d 188 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Attorney General of Canada v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc.
The common law Revenue Rule provides that United States “courts will normally not enforce foreign tax judgments, the rationale for which is that issues of foreign relations are assigned to, and better handled by, the legislative and executive branches of the government.” United States v. Trapilo, 130 F.3d 547, 550 (2d Cir.1997), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 812 , 119 S.Ct. 45 , 142 L.Ed.2d 35 (1998); see also United States v. Boots, 80 F.3d 580, 587 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 905 , 117 S.Ct. 263 , 136 L.Ed.2d 188 (1996); Her Majesty the Queen in Right Of the Province of British Columbia …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Coutermarsh
See, e.g., United States v. Boots, 80 F.3d 580, 594 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 263 (1996) (refusing to review a district court's discretionary judgment that the case did not involve such unusual circumstances to justify taking it "outside the Guidelines' 'heartland'").
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Anderson
See, e.g., United States v. Boots, 80 F.3d 580, 594 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 263 , 136 L.Ed.2d 188 (1996) (refusing to review a district court’s discretionary judgment that the case did not involve such unusual circumstances to justify taking it “outside the Guidelines’ ‘heartland’ ”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Brooks
v.
Price
v.
Price
No. 96-5623.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 1996.
Published
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.