Case: Withrow v. Williams; Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Sac and Fox Nation; Monroe Auto Equipment Co. v. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), Monroe Auto Equipment Company Unit of Local 878, In re McDonald; Seltzer v. Office of Personnel Management; DiNola v. Stewart et al.; Holly v. True, Warden, et al.; Beaumont et al. v. United States; Vey v. Wolfe, Attorney General of Pennsylvania; Hughes v. Borgert, Warden; Mix v. City of Hazel Park et al.; Morrison v. Estelle, Warden; Raphlah v. Texas, In re Harris; Watts v. Mazurkiewicz, Warden, et al.; Dempsey v. Harshbarger, Attorney General of Massachusetts
Abbreviation: Withrow v. Williams
Decision Date: 1993-06-28
Docket Number: No. 91-1030; No. 92-259; No. 92-1512; No. 92-1551; No. 92-1565; No. 92-1724; No. 92-7249; No. 92-7893; No. 92-7955; No. 92-7958; No. 92-7974; No. 92-8009; No. 92-8092; No. 92-8103; No. 92-8107; No. 92-8259
Citation: 509 U.S. 933
Volume: 509
Reporter: United States Reports
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Withrow v. Williams, Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Sac and Fox Nation, Monroe Auto Equipment Co. v. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricul tural Implement Workers of America (UAW), Monroe Auto Equipment Company Unit of Local 878, In re McDonald, Seltzer v. Office of Personnel Management, DiNola v. Stewart et al., Holly v. True, Warden, et al., Beaumont et al. v. United States, Vey v. Wolfe, Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Hughes v. Borgert, Warden, Mix v. City of Hazel Park et al., Morrison v. Estelle, Warden, Raphlah v. Texas, In re Harris, Watts v. Mazurkiewicz, Warden, et al., Dempsey v. Harshbarger, Attorney General of Massachusetts,
Judges: 
Pages: 933–934

Head Matter:
No. 91-1030.
No. 92-259.
No. 92-1512.
Withrow v. Williams, Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Sac and Fox Nation, Monroe Auto Equipment Co. v. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricul tural Implement Workers of America (UAW), Monroe Auto Equipment Company Unit of Local 878, In re McDonald, Seltzer v. Office of Personnel Management, DiNola v. Stewart et al., Holly v. True, Warden, et al., Beaumont et al. v. United States, Vey v. Wolfe, Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Hughes v. Borgert, Warden, Mix v. City of Hazel Park et al., Morrison v. Estelle, Warden, Raphlah v. Texas, In re Harris, Watts v. Mazurkiewicz, Warden, et al., Dempsey v. Harshbarger, Attorney General of Massachusetts,

Opinion:
507 U. S. 680; 508 U. S. 114; 508 U. S. 931; 508 U. S. 905; 508 U. S. 911; 508 U. S. 961; 508 U. S. 914; 507 U. S. 1054; 508 U. S. 918; 508 U. S. 918; 508 U. S. 919; 508 U. S. 920; 508 U. S. 922; 508 U. S. 905; 508 U. S. 923; and 508 U. S. 943.
No. 92-1551.
No. 92-1565.
No. 92-1724.
No. 92-7249.
No. 92-7893.
No. 92-7955.
No. 92-7958.
No. 92-7974.
No. 92-8009.
No. 92-8092.
No. 92-8103.
No. 92-8107.
No. 92-8259.
Petitions for rehearing denied.