18 U.S.C. § 1738
Repealed. Pub. L. 106–578, § 4, Dec. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 3076]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1984–2009 · leading case: Smith v. Bob Smith Chevrolet, Inc., 275 F. Supp. 2d 808 (W.D. Ky. 2003).
Smith v. Bob Smith Chevrolet, Inc., 275 F. Supp. 2d 808 (W.D. Ky. 2003). “The parties are in agreement that under the Full Faith and Credit Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1738 , Kentucky's claim preclusion rule applies to this analysis.”
Johnny Lee Prymer v. Kevin Ogden, Simon Solis, & Mark Hollis, 29 F.3d 1208 (7th Cir. 1994). “In this case, the mandate of 18 U.S.C. § 1738 (requiring federal courts to give full faith and credit to the judgments of state courts) controls the analysis, and we are required to give the final criminal judgment of the trial court of Illinois the same effect as it would have…”
Richard R. Bergeron v. Est. of William Loeb, 777 F.2d 792 (1st Cir. 1985). “18 U.S.C. § 1738 (1982); Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.”
Preferred Auto. Sales, Inc. v. DCFS USA, LLC, 625 F. Supp. 2d 459 (E.D. Ky. 2009). “Further, the Full Faith and Credit Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1738 , requires “federal courts to give preclusive effect to state-court judgments whenever the courts of the State from which the judgments emerged would do so.”
Harrison v. Celotex Corp., 583 F. Supp. 1497 (E.D. Tenn. 1984). “IV, § 1, nor the implementing statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1738 , has any application to the present problem.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.