Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Geldermann, Inc. v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission

488 U.S. 816

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1988-10-03
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • state court result will bind federal prosecutors only if they “substantially controlled]” the state action or were “virtually represented]” by the state prosecutor
  • “The express language of this subsection suggests that the priority or lien granted thereunder is limited to securing the newly incurred debt authorized by that provision.”
  • denial of a continuance by a district court will not be reversed absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion
  • privity can be established for purposes of collateral estoppel by virtual representation

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Geldermann, Inc. v. Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
105 opinions