Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Mendes v. Johnson, 389 A.2d 781 (1978)

Citation
Mendes v. Johnson, 389 A.2d 781 (1978)
Parent Document
Mendes v. Johnson, 389 A.2d 781 (1978)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
1978-06-13

Other Sections in This Document (216)

Full Text

593 chars
The Supreme Court, in addressing this question, has accorded the lower federal and state courts wide latitude to employ such approaches as deemed appropriate in formulating responses to the retrospectivity-prospectivity problem. In a landmark decision on the subject, Great Northern Ry. Co. v. Sunburst Oil and Refining Co., 287 U.S. 358, 53 S.Ct. 145, 77 L.Ed. 360 (1932), the Court examined the constitutional dimensions of retroactive as well as prospective application of overruling decisions. The Court declared that retrospectivity is neither required nor prohibited by the Constitution: