Taylor v. Sturgell
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
Later courts apply Taylor’s rule against binding people who were not parties to an earlier judgment, its recognized exceptions, and the limits Taylor itself placed on its holding. The Supreme Court also cited Taylor approvingly in Trump v. CASA, Inc.
2,503 later cases cite Taylor v. Sturgell; 459 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Taylor v. Sturgell?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.
Every one of the 459 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Taylor v. Sturgell and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace