Citation network
California Vs. Texas
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 22, 1978
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 601 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court California v. TexasSearch
-
U.S. 601 (1978) California v. TexasSearch
-
in light of Edelman v. JordanSearch
-
U. S. 651 (1974), this Court's decision in Worcester County Trust Co. v. RileySearch
-
Post at 437 U. S. 615 . I am not so sure as they that Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
This conclusion seems to me squarely contrary to a longstanding precedent of this Court, the case of Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
I have joined in the order denying California's motion for leave to file this complaint only because I think Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
invokes the original and exclusive jurisdiction Page 437 U. S. 604 of this Court on the authority of Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
supra. II In Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
now before us are indistinguishable in all material respects from those on which jurisdiction was based in Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
a)(1), and it has a responsibility to exercise that jurisdiction when it is properly invoked. See Cohens v. VirginiaSearch
-
Massachusetts v. MissouriSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 1 , 308 U. S. 19 -20. If Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
is under a duty in this case to grant California's motion to file its complaint. I believe, however, that Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
or controversy in the constitutional sense. Page 437 U. S. 607 III The Court's readiness in Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
unless all interested parties could, by chance or voluntary appearance, be brought before a single forum. Baker v. BakerSearch
-
that being the State of the decedent's domicile, First National Bank v. MaineSearch
-
The somewhat unexpected answer came in Worcester County Trust Co. v. RileySearch
-
Federal interpleader is based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction, see State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. TashireSearch
-
Page 437 U. S. 609 When the identical type of dispute was placed before this Court two years later in Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
As the opinion in Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
a few months later, the Court elaborated on this doctrine when it denied a motion to file a complaint in Massachusetts v. MissouriSearch
-
Id. at 308 U. S. 15 . Thus, even after Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
and grant one State the exclusive right to tax the decedent's estate. IV In reality, the facts in Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
State may seek the aid of this Court only to protect its own interests, not the interests of others. See Massachusetts v. MissouriSearch
-
taxation arises only because the Constitution permits both States to impose the tax. Worcester County Trust Co. v. RileySearch
-
from the risk that one of the States will be left with an entirely valid but uncollectible tax judgment. Massachusetts v. MissouriSearch
-
would be irrelevant, and there is no compelling reason why it should have been the dispositive question in Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
decision where Hughes was domiciled when he died, and permit only the State of domicile to tax the estate. Cf. Texas v. NewSearch
-
contacts with each State to support a finding of domicile under each State's law -- a premise of jurisdiction in Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
bar of res judicata if its potential conflict with Texas is not preempted at this incipient stage. Cf. Treinies v. SunshineSearch
-
Court exists to remedy real and substantial injuries inflicted by sovereign States upon their sister States. New York v. NewSearch
-
inflicted by one State upon another. New York v. NewSearch
-
Missouri v. IllinoisSearch
-
and realty are constitutionally subject to taxation only at the place of situs. See Union Refrigerator Transit Co. v. KentuckySearch
-
personal property may, at least theoretically, be taxed only at the place of the owner's domicile. First Nat. Bank v. MaineSearch
-
necessarily exceed the value of the Hughes estate, and argues that this fact distinguishes the present case from Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
I think this holding has been substantially undercut by subsequent developments. In Edelman v. JordanSearch
-
an understanding of the Eleventh Amendment quite different from that manifested in Worcester County Trust Co. v. RileySearch
-
Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
may become the wedge to open the door slammed in Worcester County Trust Co. v. RileySearch
-
But What of Domicile, 53 Harv.L.Rev. 68, 75 (1939). This first complaint was dismissed without prejudice. Texas v. NewSearch
-
that the assets were insufficient to meet all claims, that the Court took jurisdiction in Texas v. FloridaSearch
-
Massachusetts v. MissouriSearch
-
In Western Union Telegraph Co. v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court California v. TexasSearch
-
of Edelman v. JordanSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial