Citation network
Tenet Vs. Doe
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 02, 2005
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
-
October Term, 2004 Tenet V. DoeSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States Tenet Et Al. V. DoeSearch
-
claims were not barred by the rule of Totten v. UnitedSearch
-
claims, relying mainly on United States v. ReynoldsSearch
-
s more sweeping holding in Weinberger v. CatholicSearch
-
s categorical bar in the distinct class of cases that depend upon clandestine spy relationships. Nor does Webster v. DoeSearch
-
J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Ginsburg, J., joined. Scalia, J., filed a concurring opinion. Tenet v. DoeSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Tenet V. DoeSearch
-
Director of Central Intelli- Gence and Director of the Cen- Tral Intelligence Agency, and United States, Petitioners V. JohnSearch
-
Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court. In Totten v. UnitedSearch
-
upon the existence of their secret espionage relationship with the Government. Relying mainly on United States v. ReynoldsSearch
-
supra, at 7, n. 11 (citing Totten , supra, at 107). See also Brief for United States in United States v. ReynoldsSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
we again credited the more sweeping holding in Totten , thus confirming its continued validity. See Weinberger v. CatholicSearch
-
privilege in the dis- tinct class of cases that depend upon clandestine spy relationships. Nor does Webster v. DoeSearch
-
Footnote 4 Preliminarily, we must address whether Steel Co. v. CitizensSearch
-
issue that Steel Co. directs must be resolved before addressing the merits of a claim. Cf. United States v. MitchellSearch
-
Nevertheless, application of the Totten rule of dismissal, like the abstention doctrine of Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
we have recognized may be resolved before addressing jurisdiction. See Ruhrgas AG v. MarathonSearch
-
see also Kowalski v. TesmerSearch
-
Brief for United States in Webster v. DoeSearch
-
mean that the employment relationship between him and the CIA was not known and admitted by the CIA. Tenet v. DoeSearch
-
Justice Stevens, with whom Justice Ginsburg joins, concurring. In Totten v. UnitedSearch
-
see also Steel Co. v. CitizensSearch
-
Stevens, J., concurring in judgment). Tenet v. DoeSearch
-
s action as a vindication of his opinion concurring in the judgment in Steel Co. v. CitizensSearch
-
s opinion refers to the issue in Totten v. UnitedSearch
-
of Totten v. UnitedSearch
-
Weinberger v. CatholicSearch
-
of the Court. In Totten v. UnitedSearch
-
See Weinberger v. CatholicSearch
-
Steel Co. v. CitizensSearch
-
Cf. United States v. MitchellSearch
-
of Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
See Ruhrgas AG v. MarathonSearch
-
the CIA. Tenet v. DoeSearch
-
In Totten v. UnitedSearch
-
Totten v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. ReynoldsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial