Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.

UNITED STATES v. REORGANIZED CF&I FABRICATORS OF UTAH, INC., et al. (1996)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
UNITED STATES v. REORGANIZED CF&I FABRICATORS OF UTAH, INC., et al.
Term: 1995
Important Dates
Argued: March 25, 1996
Decided: June 20, 1996
Outcome
Vacated and remanded
Vote
9-0
Majority
Stephen BreyerRuth Bader GinsburgAnthony KennedySandra Day O'ConnorWilliam RehnquistAntonin ScaliaDavid SouterJohn Paul Stevens
Concurring
Clarence Thomas

UNITED STATES v. REORGANIZED CF&I FABRICATORS OF UTAH, INC., et al. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 20, 1996. The case was argued before the court on March 25, 1996.

In a 9-0 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. The case originated from the Utah U.S. District Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 1990s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Rehnquist Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Federal Taxation - Priority of federal fiscal claims: over those of the states or private entities
  • Petitioner: United States
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: employer. If employer's relations with employees are governed by the nature of the employer's business (e.g., railroad, boat), rather than labor law generally, the more specific designation is used in place of Employer.
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 518 U.S. 213
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: William Rehnquist
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: David Souter

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes