Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Citation
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Parent Document
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Jurisdiction
- United States (federal)
- Effective Date
- 1977-02-15
Other Sections in This Document (48)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
- Thompson v. Washington, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 357 (1977)
Full Text
1,098 chars. Appellees framed their argument in terms of retroactivity analysis, quoting at length from the Supreme Court’s decision in Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson, 404 U.S. 97, 106-07, 92 S.Ct. 349, 30 L.Ed.2d 296 (1971). However, as the Court recognized in Lemon II, 411 U.S. at 199-200, 93 S.Ct. 1463, determining the proper scope of an equitable decree is a distinct problem from the question, raised in the retroactivity cases, of whether a new holding should be applied in other cases which in relevant aspects began before the new rule of law was announced. Even so, the Court in Lemon II noted that the guidelines established in the retroactivity cases are helpful in reviewing the retrospective reach of an injunctive decree, id., and proceeded to *363examine the balance of equities, and, more particularly, the degree of reliance by the defendants and the extent to which the holding of Lemon I was foreshadowed, see id. at 201-03, 206, 93 S.Ct. 1463. Thus, appellees’ doctrinal imprecision in no way undermines the validity of the factors which they relied upon in their motion to the District Court.