Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 California opinions name it 2 courts 1955–2009 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Martin v. McGrathgreen2 sentences1955Therefore the claimants can derive no rights from the Treaty and the rule that such Treaty, as the supreme law of the land, supersedes the provisions of section 259 of the Probate Code which are inconsistent with it (Clark v. Allen, 331 U.S. 503 ,- 508 [ 67 S.Ct. 1431 , 91 L.Ed. 1633 , 170 A.L.R. 953 ] ; Estate of Meyer, 107 Cal.App.2d 799, 804 [ 238 P.2d 597 ]) is not applicable to this ease. 1955Therefore the claimants can derive no rights from the Treaty and the rule that such Treaty, as the supreme law of the land, supersedes the provisions of section 259 of the Probate Code which are inconsistent with it (Clark v. Allen, 331 U.S. 503 ,- 508 [ 67 S.Ct. 1431 , 91 L.Ed. 1633 , 170 A.L.R. 953 ] ; Estate of Meyer, 107 Cal.App.2d 799, 804 [ 238 P.2d 597 ]) is not applicable to this ease. | 2 | 2 |
Clark v. Allengreen2 sentences1955Therefore the claimants can derive no rights from the Treaty and the rule that such Treaty, as the supreme law of the land, supersedes the provisions of section 259 of the Probate Code which are inconsistent with it (Clark v. Allen, 331 U.S. 503 ,- 508 [ 67 S.Ct. 1431 , 91 L.Ed. 1633 , 170 A.L.R. 953 ] ; Estate of Meyer, 107 Cal.App.2d 799, 804 [ 238 P.2d 597 ]) is not applicable to this ease. 1955Therefore the claimants can derive no rights from the Treaty and the rule that such Treaty, as the supreme law of the land, supersedes the provisions of section 259 of the Probate Code which are inconsistent with it (Clark v. Allen, 331 U.S. 503 ,- 508 [ 67 S.Ct. 1431 , 91 L.Ed. 1633 , 170 A.L.R. 953 ] ; Estate of Meyer, 107 Cal.App.2d 799, 804 [ 238 P.2d 597 ]) is not applicable to this ease. | 1 | 2 |
Breard v. Greenegreen2 sentences2009The Court of Appeal rejected both claims, finding that the alleged treaty violation should have been raised on direct appeal, citing Breard v. Greene (1998) 523 U.S. 371, 375-376 [ 140 L.Ed.2d 529 , 118 S.Ct. 1352 ]. 2009The Court of Appeal rejected both claims, finding that the alleged treaty violation should have been raised on direct appeal, citing Breard v. Greene (1998) 523 U.S. 371, 375-376 [ 140 L.Ed.2d 529 , 118 S.Ct. 1352 ]. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Laragreen2 sentences2006II, § 2, cl. 2; see United States v. Lara (2004) 541 U.S. *250 193 [ 158 L.Ed.2d 420 , 124 S.Ct. 1628 ] [Indian relations became exclusive province of federal law after Constitution ratified].) The Court of Appeal pointed out, however, that authority for applying the tribal immunity doctrine in this case cannot be premised on the treaty clause “because the Tribe has cited no treaty that exists between it and the federal government.” As the high court recently recognized, since 1871 Congress has not had the power to negotiate new treaties with Indian tribes. 2006II, § 2, cl. 2; see United States v. Lara (2004) 541 U.S. *250 193 [ 158 L.Ed.2d 420 , 124 S.Ct. 1628 ] [Indian relations became exclusive province of federal law after Constitution ratified].) The Court of Appeal pointed out, however, that authority for applying the tribal immunity doctrine in this case cannot be premised on the treaty clause “because the Tribe has cited no treaty that exists between it and the federal government.” As the high court recently recognized, since 1871 Congress has not had the power to negotiate new treaties with Indian tribes. | 1 | 1 |
Morton v. Mancarigreen2 sentences2006(Morton v. Mancari (1974) 417 U.S. 535, 551-552 [ 41 L.Ed.2d 290 , 94 S.Ct. 2474 ].) Congress itself has invoked this plenary, constitutionally based power, as authorization for its own legislation. 2006(Morton v. Mancari (1974) 417 U.S. 535, 551-552 [ 41 L.Ed.2d 290 , 94 S.Ct. 2474 ].) Congress itself has invoked this plenary, constitutionally based power, as authorization for its own legislation. | 1 | 1 |
The Antelopegreen2 sentences1989I, ї 10.) Although the word "treaty" has more than one meaning in international parlance, under our Constitution the term refers specifically to an international agreement concluded by the President with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. ( Weinberger v. Rossi (1982) 456 U.S. 25, 29 [ 71 L.Ed.2d 715, 720 , 102 S.Ct. 1510 ].) It is clear that the informal arrangement between the County of San Diego and Tijuana juvenile authorities does not come within the constitutional definition of "treaty." It should be equally clear that when a California city or county negotiates an agreem 1989I, ї 10.) Although the word "treaty" has more than one meaning in international parlance, under our Constitution the term refers specifically to an international agreement concluded by the President with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. ( Weinberger v. Rossi (1982) 456 U.S. 25, 29 [ 71 L.Ed.2d 715, 720 , 102 S.Ct. 1510 ].) It is clear that the informal arrangement between the County of San Diego and Tijuana juvenile authorities does not come within the constitutional definition of "treaty." It should be equally clear that when a California city or county negotiates an agreem | 1 | 1 |
Southern Pacific Company v. Jensenred2 sentences1989(Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen (1917) 244 U.S. 205, 209 [ 61 L.Ed. 1086, 1095 , 37 S.Ct. 524, 529 ].) Manuel asserts section 738 and the Border Youth Project violate this principle by infringing upon both the treaty clause which provides “No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance or confederation” (U.S. Const., art. 1989(Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen (1917) 244 U.S. 205, 209 [ 61 L.Ed. 1086, 1095 , 37 S.Ct. 524, 529 ].) Manuel asserts section 738 and the Border Youth Project violate this principle by infringing upon both the treaty clause which provides “No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance or confederation” (U.S. Const., art. | 1 | 1 |
Hines v. Davidowitzgreen2 sentences1989I, § 10) and the federal government’s “full and exclusive responsibility for the conduct of affairs with foreign sovereign-ties.” (Hines v. Davidowitz (1941) 312 U.S. 52, 63 [ 85 L.Ed. 581, 584 , 61 S.Ct. 399 ].) Clearly, however, section 738 does not constitute an attempt on the part of this state to enter into a treaty or agreement with any foreign power. 1989I, § 10) and the federal government’s “full and exclusive responsibility for the conduct of affairs with foreign sovereign-ties.” (Hines v. Davidowitz (1941) 312 U.S. 52, 63 [ 85 L.Ed. 581, 584 , 61 S.Ct. 399 ].) Clearly, however, section 738 does not constitute an attempt on the part of this state to enter into a treaty or agreement with any foreign power. | 1 | 1 |
Weinberger v. Rossigreen2 sentences1989I, ї 10.) Although the word "treaty" has more than one meaning in international parlance, under our Constitution the term refers specifically to an international agreement concluded by the President with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. ( Weinberger v. Rossi (1982) 456 U.S. 25, 29 [ 71 L.Ed.2d 715, 720 , 102 S.Ct. 1510 ].) It is clear that the informal arrangement between the County of San Diego and Tijuana juvenile authorities does not come within the constitutional definition of "treaty." It should be equally clear that when a California city or county negotiates an agreem 1989I, ї 10.) Although the word "treaty" has more than one meaning in international parlance, under our Constitution the term refers specifically to an international agreement concluded by the President with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. ( Weinberger v. Rossi (1982) 456 U.S. 25, 29 [ 71 L.Ed.2d 715, 720 , 102 S.Ct. 1510 ].) It is clear that the informal arrangement between the County of San Diego and Tijuana juvenile authorities does not come within the constitutional definition of "treaty." It should be equally clear that when a California city or county negotiates an agreem | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rosado v. Civiletti
green
2 sentences1989I, ї 10.) Although the word "treaty" has more than one meaning in international parlance, under our Constitution the term refers specifically to an international agreement concluded by the President with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. ( Weinberger v. Rossi (1982) 456 U.S. 25, 29 [ 71 L.Ed.2d 715, 720 , 102 S.Ct. 1510 ].) It is clear that the informal arrangement between the County of San Diego and Tijuana juvenile authorities does not come within the constitutional definition of "treaty." It should be equally clear that when a California city or county negotiates an agreem 1989I, ї 10.) Although the word "treaty" has more than one meaning in international parlance, under our Constitution the term refers specifically to an international agreement concluded by the President with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. ( Weinberger v. Rossi (1982) 456 U.S. 25, 29 [ 71 L.Ed.2d 715, 720 , 102 S.Ct. 1510 ].) It is clear that the informal arrangement between the County of San Diego and Tijuana juvenile authorities does not come within the constitutional definition of "treaty." It should be equally clear that when a California city or county negotiates an agreem | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.