Loading…

Schad v. Arizona — freecase.ai

Search Pricing About Why now Resources Guides

Opinion

Schad v. Arizona

498 U.S. 894 · Supreme Court of the United States · Oct 9, 1990

Full text

Schad v. Arizona

Opinions in this case

Majority
Majority

Sup. Ct. Ariz. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted.

Notice

Freecase is a legal research tool. It does not determine whether a case is good law and does not provide legal advice.

Metadata

Status: Published
Author
Judges: Not listed
Cluster ID: 9101822

Citations

498 U.S. 894
111 S. Ct. 243

Cited by

United States v. Nunez-Vasquez
Third Circuit · May 20, 1998
State v. Fortune
Washington Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1996
Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia v. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission, D.C. Transit System, Inc., Intervenor
D.C. Circuit · Nov 4, 1994
Transohio Savings Bank v. Director, Office of Thrift Supervision
D.C. Circuit · Jan 5, 1993
Association of Accredited Cosmetology Schools v. Lamar Alexander, Secretary, United States Department of Education

© 2026 freecase.aicontact@freecase.aiBuilt by lawyers. Powered by AI.

Freecase.ai provides legal information for educational and research purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Always consult a licensed attorney for legal guidance. Terms of Service

D.C. Circuit · Nov 24, 1992

Bouwkamp v. State

Wyoming Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1992

Colorado v. Cavazos

Tenth Circuit · Apr 17, 1992

Virginia State Education Assistance Authority v. Alexander

E.D. Virginia · Jul 30, 1991

Rhode Island Higher Education Assistance Authority v. Secretary, U.S. Department of Education

First Circuit · Apr 5, 1991

United States v. Willie Horton

Fourth Circuit · Dec 26, 1990

RHODE ISLAND HIGHER EDUC. ASST. AUTH. v. Cavazos

D. Rhode Island · Oct 24, 1990

Rhode Island Higher Education Assistance Authority v. Cavazos

D. Rhode Island · Oct 24, 1990

Parentheticals

“The reservation of the power to amend the terms of the [Guaranteed Student Loan] program prevents the participating state agencies from invoking the Fifth Amendment Takings bar against subsequent Congressional action.”
Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia v. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission, D.C. Transit System, Inc., Intervenor