Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Thomas Vs. Arn

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Dec 04, 1985

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

64 entries 9 linked 55 unlinked
Show
  1. Cupp Vs. Naughten US Supreme Court · Dec 04, 1973
  2. United States Vs. Payner US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1980
  3. United States Vs. Raddatz US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1980
  4. Raley Vs. Ohio US Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1959
  5. Barker Vs. Wingo US Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1972
  6. Mathews Vs. Weber US Supreme Court · Jan 14, 1976
  7. Crowell Vs. Benson US Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1932
  8. Armstrong Vs. Manzo US Supreme Court · Apr 27, 1965
  9. Oklahoma City Vs. Tuttle US Supreme Court · Jun 03, 1985
  10. U.S. 140 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court Thomas v. Arn
    Search
  11. U.S. 140 (1985) Thomas v. Arn
    Search
  12. about her state of mind at the time of the shooting. The Court of Appeals of Cuyahoga County reversed. State v. Thomas
    Search
  13. App. 9. The Ohio Supreme Court, on discretionary review, reversed. State v. Thomas
    Search
  14. to file objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court's order. See United States v. Walters
    Search
  15. objections to the Magistrate's report. Id. at 815. The court relied upon its prior decision in United States v. Walters
    Search
  16. granted the petition for a writ of certiorari, 470 U.S. 1027 (1985), and we now affirm. II In United States v. Walters
    Search
  17. Later opinions of the Sixth Circuit make it clear that the court views Walters in this way. See Patterson v. Mintzes
    Search
  18. United States v. Martin
    Search
  19. has also shown that its rule is not jurisdictional by excusing the procedural default in a recent case. See Patterson v. Mintzes
    Search
  20. that permit, at the least, the promulgation of procedural rules governing the management of litigation. Cf. Cuyler v. Sullivan
    Search
  21. Barker v. Wingo
    Search
  22. order or pay a filing fee established by a court of appeals, that court could certainly dismiss the appeal. Cf. Link v. Wabash
    Search
  23. United States v. Schronce
    Search
  24. Lorin Corp. v. Goto
    Search
  25. b)(1)(A). See Park Motor Mart, Inc. v. Ford
    Search
  26. in dealing with a caseload that was increasing far more rapidly than the number of judgeships. Mathews v. Weber
    Search
  27. Northern Pipeline Co. v. Marathon
    Search
  28. Pipe Line Co., 458 U. S. 50 , 458 U. S. 77 (1982) (plurality opinion), quoting Crowell v. Benson
    Search
  29. Logan v. Zimmerman
    Search
  30. ibid., quoting Armstrong v. Manzo
    Search
  31. In Ohio, the court's syllabus contains the controlling law. See Engle v. Isaac
    Search
  32. U. S. 107 , 456 U. S. 111 , n. 3 (1982), citing Haas v. State
    Search
  33. have adopted waiver rules similar to the Sixth Circuit rule at issue in the present case. See Park Motor Mart, Inc. v. Ford
    Search
  34. McCarthy v. Manson
    Search
  35. United State v. Schronce
    Search
  36. United States v. Lewis
    Search
  37. Circuits have concluded that the failure to file objections waives only factual issues on the appeal. See Britt v. Simi
    Search
  38. Nettles v. Wainwright
    Search
  39. Lorin Corp. v. Goto
    Search
  40. The Courts of Appeals have often exercised that authority. See, e.g., Tingler v. Marshall
    Search
  41. United States v. Florea
    Search
  42. United States v. Schiavo
    Search
  43. procedures for enjoining publication of in formation concerning criminal trial), cert. denied sub nom. Ditter v. Philadelphia
    Search
  44. see Walters, 638 F.2d at 950. See also McCarthy v. Manson
    Search
  45. Petitioner points to a passage in the House Report that quotes from Campbell v. United
    Search
  46. The 1976 amendments were prompted by this Court's decision in Wingo v. Weddin
    Search
  47. the merits of an issue even though a procedural default relieved it of the duty to do so. See, e.g., Oklahoma City v. Tuttle
    Search
  48. On Lee v. United
    Search
  49. U.S. Supreme Court Thomas v. Arn
    Search
  50. State v. Thomas
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial