Citation network
Sullivan Vs. Stroop
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 14, 1990
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
-
U.S. 478 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Sullivan v. StroopSearch
-
U.S. 478 (1990) Sullivan v. StroopSearch
-
as used in the two Parts must be given the same meaning. See, e.g., Sorenson v. SecretarySearch
-
Pet. for Cert. 22a. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the District Court. Stroop v. BowenSearch
-
a)(8)(A)(vi), and the only known discussion of the purpose of the disregard provision is in our decision in Bowen v. GilliardSearch
-
the decision of the Fourth Circuit and the contrary holding of the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in Todd v. NormanSearch
-
K Mart Corp. v. CartierSearch
-
Brief for Respondents 20 (citing Sullivan v. EverhartSearch
-
Sorenson v. SecretarySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
of the Treasury, 475 U. S. 851 , 475 U. S. 860 (1986) (quoting Helvering v. StockholmsSearch
-
Enskilda Bank, 293 U. S. 84 , 293 U. S. 87 (1934)) (quoting Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
ensure that a worker's dependents will have some income, should the worker retire, die, or become disabled. Califano v. BolesSearch
-
and Supp. V). The sole and express purpose of Title II childrens' benefits is to support dependent children. Jimenez v. WeinbergerSearch
-
all such maxims, however, this is merely a general assumption, and is not always valid or applicable. In Erlenbaugh v. UnitedSearch
-
of one was absent in the context of the other. Id. at 409 U. S. 245 -247. See also District of Columbia v. CarterSearch
-
Helvering v. StockholmsSearch
-
This Court's articulation of the limits of the maxim in Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
a)(38) (1982 ed. Supp. V). See Bowen v. GilliardSearch
-
its purpose and legislative history, it is not entitled to deference, and should be rejected by this Court. See NLRB v. FoodSearch
-
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
fulfilled by Title II payments, recognizing the functional equivalence of the two types of payments. See, e g., Stroop v. BowenSearch
-
Todd v. NormanSearch
-
by a Governmental agency, not directly by the parent, their ultimate source is the parent's earnings. See Califano v. BolesSearch
-
this Court's usual reluctance to infer the intent of one Congress from the views expressed by another. See Russello v. UnitedSearch
-
Oscar Mayer & Co. v. EvansSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Sullivan v. StroopSearch
-
the District Court. Stroop v. BowenSearch
-
Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
In Erlenbaugh v. UnitedSearch
-
Supp. V). See Bowen v. GilliardSearch
-
Court. See NLRB v. FoodSearch
-
Stroop v. BowenSearch
-
See Califano v. BolesSearch
-
See Russello v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial