Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Maine

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Feb 25, 1986

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

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

32 entries 32 unlinked
Show
  1. U.S. 89 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Maine
    Search
  2. U.S. 89 (1986) United States v. Maine
    Search
  3. hereinafter Juridical Regime). See United States v. Louisiana
    Search
  4. the international understanding of occupation. Page 475 U. S. 99 In the Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v. Norway
    Search
  5. see id. at 142. Of similar effect is the case of Annakumaru Pillai v. Muthupayal
    Search
  6. would still be troubled by the lack of any linkage between these activities and the English Crown. Cf. United States v. Alaska
    Search
  7. miles seaward of the coastline, and of the States to the seabed within the 3-geographic-mile zone. United States v. Maine
    Search
  8. U. S. 1 (1975). See also United States v. Maine
    Search
  9. Mahler v. Norwich
    Search
  10. asserts that it acquired sovereignty over the area by virtue of the Treaty of Paris signed in 1783. Cf. Manchester v. Massachusetts
    Search
  11. United States v. California
    Search
  12. Report of the Special Master, O.T. 1973, No. 52 Orig., p. 42. Cf. United States v. Louisiana
    Search
  13. See United States v. California
    Search
  14. quoting United States v. California
    Search
  15. nation has traditionally asserted and maintained dominion with the acquiescence of foreign nations.' United States v. California
    Search
  16. U.S. at 381 U. S. 172 . See also United States v. Alaska
    Search
  17. and (3) the acquiescence of foreign nations. See United States v. Alaska
    Search
  18. Colorado v. New
    Search
  19. agreed with the judgment of the Officiating Chief Judge and with his historical analysis. See Annakumaru Pillai v. Muthupayal
    Search
  20. In Commonwealth v. Peters
    Search
  21. Shaw's adoption of the Coke test in Peters is consistent with Judge Story's earlier exposition in United States v. Grush
    Search
  22. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Maine
    Search
  23. Juridical Regime). See United States v. Louisiana
    Search
  24. In the Fisheries Case (United Kingdom v. Norway
    Search
  25. of Annakumaru Pillai v. Muthupayal
    Search
  26. and the English Crown. Cf. United States v. Alaska
    Search
  27. Cf. Manchester v. Massachusetts
    Search
  28. Cf. United States v. Louisiana
    Search
  29. See United States v. Alaska
    Search
  30. See Annakumaru Pillai v. Muthupayal
    Search
  31. United States v. Grush
    Search
  32. United States v. Alaska
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales