Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Tonasket Vs. Washington

Tonasket vs Washington

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Apr-24-1973
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/103298

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
411 U.S. 451
Subject
MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue
MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Tonasket

Respondent

Washington

Excerpt

tonasket v. washington - 411 u.s. 451 (1973) u.s. supreme court tonasket v. washington, 411 u.s. 451 (1973) 411 u.s. 451 tonasket v. washington et al. appeal from the supreme court of washington no. 71-1031. argued december 12-13, 1972 decided april 24, 1973 79 wash. 2d 607, 488 p.2d 281, vacated and remanded. robert l. pirtle argued the cause and filed briefs for appellant. slade gorton, attorney general of washington, argued the cause for appellees. with him on the brief were timothy r. malone, senior assistant attorney general, and william d. dexter, assistant attorney general. alvin j. ziontz argued the cause and filed a brief for confederated tribes of the colville reservation et al. as amici curiae. * [ footnote * ] briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed by solicitor general griswold, assistant attorney general frizzell, harry r. sachse, and edmund b. clark for the united states; by charles a. hobbs and richard a. baenen for the national congress of american indians; by david h. getches for the native american rights fund; and by pearson, yurok indian and trader on the hoopa reservation. william d. dexter, assistant attorney general of washington, and eugene f. corrigan filed a brief for multistate tax commission as amicus curiae urging affirmance. per curiam. the judgment of the supreme court of washington is vacated, and the case is remanded to that court for reconsideration in light of 6 and 7 of c. 157, 1972 extraordinary session laws of the state of washington, and this court's decision in mcclanahan v. arizona state tax comm'n, ante, p. 164. page 411 u.s. 451, 452

Full Judgment

TONASKET v. WASHINGTON - 411 U.S. 451 (1973)
U.S. Supreme Court TONASKET v. WASHINGTON, 411 U.S. 451 (1973) 411 U.S. 451

TONASKET v. WASHINGTON ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON

No. 71-1031.

Argued December 12-13, 1972
Decided April 24, 1973

79 Wash. 2d 607, 488 P.2d 281, vacated and remanded.

Robert L. Pirtle argued the cause and filed briefs for appellant.

Slade Gorton, Attorney General of Washington, argued the cause for appellees. With him on the brief were Timothy R. Malone, Senior Assistant Attorney General, and William D. Dexter, Assistant Attorney General.

Alvin J. Ziontz argued the cause and filed a brief for Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation et al. as amici curiae. *

[ Footnote * ] Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed by Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Frizzell, Harry R. Sachse, and Edmund B. Clark for the United States; by Charles A. Hobbs and Richard A. Baenen for the National Congress of American Indians; by David H. Getches for the Native American Rights Fund; and by Pearson, Yurok Indian and Trader on the Hoopa Reservation.

William D. Dexter, Assistant Attorney General of Washington, and Eugene F. Corrigan filed a brief for Multistate Tax Commission as amicus curiae urging affirmance.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Supreme Court of Washington is vacated, and the case is remanded to that Court for reconsideration in light of 6 and 7 of c. 157, 1972 Extraordinary Session Laws of the State of Washington, and this Court's decision in McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Comm'n, ante, p. 164.

Page 411 U.S. 451, 452



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial