Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

LevIn Vs. Commerce Energy, Inc.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 01, 2010

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

69 entries 8 linked 61 unlinked
Show
  1. Mueller Vs. Allen US Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1983
  2. Califano Vs. Westcott US Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1979
  3. Orr Vs. Orr US Supreme Court · Mar 05, 1979
  4. Hibbs Vs. Winn US Supreme Court · Jun 14, 2004
  5. Hodel Vs. Indiana US Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1981
  6. Heckler Vs. Mathews US Supreme Court · Mar 05, 1984
  7. Dennis Vs. Higgins US Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1991
  8. United States Vs. Booker US Supreme Court · Jan 12, 2005
  9. Levin v. Commerce
    Search
  10. Energy, Inc. - 09-223 (2010) Syllabus October Term, 2009 Levin V. Commerce
    Search
  11. from entertaining claims that risk disrupting state tax administration, see Fair Assessment in Real Estate Assn., Inc. v. McNary
    Search
  12. s comity ruling, and remanded for adjudication of the merits. A footnote in Hibbs v. Winn
    Search
  13. operations, therefore their tax-enforcement methods should not be interfered with absent strong cause. See Dows v. Chicago
    Search
  14. partial codification of the federal reluctance to interfere with state taxation, National Private Truck Council, Inc. v. Oklahoma
    Search
  15. Hillsborough v. Cromwell
    Search
  16. view constitutional challenges with the skepticism due respect for legislative choices demands. See, e.g., Hodel v. Indiana
    Search
  17. Madden v. Kentucky
    Search
  18. is a matter on which the Constitution is silent. See, e.g., Heckler v. Mathews
    Search
  19. generally remands the case, leaving the interim remedial choice to state courts. See, e.g., McKesson Corp. v. Division
    Search
  20. how to comply with the mandate of equal treatment. See Davis v. Michigan
    Search
  21. Ohio Bureau of Employment Servs. v. Hodory
    Search
  22. in the judgment, in which Scalia, J., joined. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Levin v. Commerce
    Search
  23. Energy, Inc. - 09-223 (2010) Opinion of the Court Levin V. Commerce
    Search
  24. Supreme Court of the United States No. 09-223 Richard a. Levin, Tax Commissioner of Ohio, Petitioner V. Commerce
    Search
  25. claims for relief that risk disrupting state tax administration. See Fair Assessment in Real Estate Assn., Inc. v. McNary
    Search
  26. requires that a claim of the kind here presented proceed originally in state court. In so ruling, we distinguish Hibbs v. Winn
    Search
  27. presenting challenges to state tax measures. 554 F. 3d, at 1099, 1102 (citing Milliken v. Bradley
    Search
  28. with the Seventh and Ninth Circuits, which had similarly read Hibbs to rein in the comity doctrine, see Levy v. Pappas
    Search
  29. Wilbur v. Locke
    Search
  30. with the Fourth Circuit, which had concluded that Hibbs left comity doctrine untouched, see DIRECTV, Inc. v. Tolson
    Search
  31. Fair Assessment , 454 U. S., at 112 (quoting Younger v. Harris
    Search
  32. Dows v. Chicago
    Search
  33. Boise Artesian Hot & Cold Water Co. v. Boise
    Search
  34. City , 213 U. S. 276 , 282 (1909). Accord Matthews v. Rodgers
    Search
  35. Quackenbush v. Allstate
    Search
  36. the continuing sway of comity considerations, independent of the Act. Plaintiffs in Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. Huffman
    Search
  37. Id., at 110. And in National Private Truck Council, Inc. v. Oklahoma
    Search
  38. See, e.g., Griffin v. School
    Search
  39. see Dennis v. Higgins
    Search
  40. Williamson v. Lee
    Search
  41. is a matter on which the Constitution is silent. See Heckler v. Mathews
    Search
  42. in more than one way. (quoting Iowa-Des Moines Nat. Bank v. Bennett
    Search
  43. see Stanton v. Stanton
    Search
  44. cf. United States v. Booker
    Search
  45. generally remands the case, leaving the remedial choice in the hands of state authorities. See, e.g., Wengler v. Druggists
    Search
  46. Skinner v. Oklahoma
    Search
  47. ex rel. Williamson , 316 U. S. 535 , 543 (1942). But see, e.g., Levy v. Louisiana
    Search
  48. American Trucking Assns., Inc. v. Smith
    Search
  49. McKesson Corp. v. Division
    Search
  50. absent certain exceptions, see, e.g., Department of Employment v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial