Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Hibbs Vs. Winn

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 14, 2004

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

72 entries 5 linked 67 unlinked
Show
  1. General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. Vs. Cline US Supreme Court · Feb 24, 2004
  2. Bob Jones Univ. Vs. Simon US Supreme Court · May 15, 1974
  3. United States Vs. Galletti US Supreme Court · Mar 23, 2004
  4. Kontrick Vs. Ryan US Supreme Court · Jan 14, 2004
  5. Perez Vs. Ledesma US Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1971
  6. Syllabus October Term, 2003 Hibbs V. Winn
    Search
  7. Supreme Court of the United States Hibbs, Director, Arizona Department of Revenue V. Winn
    Search
  8. Missouri v. Jenkins
    Search
  9. Schacht v. United
    Search
  10. alone, would do all the necessary work. In briefing United States v. Galletti
    Search
  11. and it requires that the legal right to disputed sums be determined in a refund suit. E.g., Bob Jones Univ. v. Simon
    Search
  12. s previous applications of that statute. See, e.g., California v. Grace
    Search
  13. s assertion, Arkansas v. Farm
    Search
  14. National Private Truck Council, Inc. v. Oklahoma
    Search
  15. Real Estate Assn., Inc. v. McNary
    Search
  16. and Rosewell v. LaSalle
    Search
  17. merits of third-party constitutional challenges to tax benefits without mentioning the TIA. See, e.g. , Byrne v. Public
    Search
  18. Griffin v. School
    Search
  19. Kennedy, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Rehnquist, C. J., and Scalia and Thomas, JJ., joined. Hibbs v. Winn
    Search
  20. Opinion of the Court Hibbs V. Winn
    Search
  21. Court of the United States No. 02-1809 J. Elliott Hibbs, Director, Arizona Depart- Ment of Revenue, Petitioner V. Kathleen
    Search
  22. the detriment of black students, fastened on tui- tion grants and tax credits as a promising means to circumvent Brown v. Board
    Search
  23. s equal protection requirement. See, e.g. , Griffin v. School
    Search
  24. g Allen v. County
    Search
  25. g 207 F. Supp. 349, 355 (ED Va. 1962) (closure of public schools enjoined). See also Moton v. Lambert
    Search
  26. before the statute went into effect. Kotterman v. Killian
    Search
  27. Winn v. Killian
    Search
  28. bars constitutional challenges to state tax credits in federal court. Compare 307 F. 3d, at 1017, with ACLU Foundation v. Bridges
    Search
  29. s appropriate decision to consider a late-filed rehearing petition. Compare Young v. Harper
    Search
  30. timeliness of petition for certiorari measured from date court disposed of rehearing petition), with Missouri v. Jenkins
    Search
  31. quoting Department of Banking of Neb. v. Pink
    Search
  32. s compass, the statute controls our decision. See, e.g. , Kontrick v. Ryan
    Search
  33. quoting Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger
    Search
  34. Laing v. United
    Search
  35. alone, would do all the necessary work. Earlier this Term, in United States v. Galletti
    Search
  36. a), 6502(a). Brief for United States in United States v. Galletti
    Search
  37. a). See Jefferson County v. Acker
    Search
  38. ibid . (quoting Enochs v. Williams
    Search
  39. a). See, e.g. , McGlotten v. Connally
    Search
  40. Tax Analysts and Advocates v. Shultz
    Search
  41. s The Federal Courts and the Federal System 1173 (5th ed. 2003) (citing Rosewell v. LaSalle
    Search
  42. s previous applications of the TIA. In California v. Grace
    Search
  43. U. S., at 410 (quoting Perez v. Ledesma
    Search
  44. taxes). Federal-court relief, therefore, would have operated to reduce the flow of state tax revenue. See Arkansas v. Farm
    Search
  45. Dunn v. Carey
    Search
  46. Wells v. Malloy
    Search
  47. Franchise Tax Board of California v. United
    Search
  48. Public Ed. & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist
    Search
  49. E.g., Bob Jones Univ. v. Simon
    Search
  50. California v. Grace
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial