27 Cited authorities

  1. Usery v. Turner Elkhorn Mining Co.

    428 U.S. 1 (1976)   Cited 899 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that black lung compensation scheme satisfied due process because it was a "rational measure to spread the costs of the employee's disabilities to those who have profited from the fruits of their labor"
  2. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. R. A. Gray Co.

    467 U.S. 717 (1984)   Cited 681 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that retroactive aspects of legislation must satisfy due process, a burden "met simply by showing that the retroactive application of the legislation is itself justified by a rational legislative purpose"
  3. United States v. Carlton

    512 U.S. 26 (1994)   Cited 166 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party's detrimental reliance on a statute prior to retroactive change is insufficient to demonstrate a due process violation where there is no vested interest
  4. United States v. Darusmont

    449 U.S. 292 (1981)   Cited 108 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the permissible period of retroactivity for federal taxation statutes "has been confined to short and limited periods required by the practicalities of producing national legislation."
  5. Milliken v. United States

    283 U.S. 15 (1931)   Cited 213 times
    Upholding retroactive application of federal estate tax statute to tax gifts made prior to enactment of the statute
  6. North v. Board of Examiners

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 5781 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 71 times
    In Matter of North v Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders of State of N.Y. (8 NY3d 745, 747), the Court of Appeals was faced with the issue whether a person convicted of the federal offense of "possession of child pornography" was subject to the registration requirements of SORA.
  7. In the Matter of Gleason

    96 N.Y.2d 117 (N.Y. 2001)   Cited 66 times
    Noting that the Legislature conveyed "a sense of immediacy," by, among other things, "direct[ing] that the amendment was to take effect immediately"
  8. Mtr. of OnBank Trust Co.

    90 N.Y.2d 725 (N.Y. 1997)   Cited 60 times
    Finding that a portion of Banking Law § 100–c would be meaningless if applied prospectively only, given the statute's reference to EPTL § 11–2.2(b), which contains a specific date, thus warranting a retroactive application of the statute
  9. Majewski v. Broadalbin-Perth Central School District

    (N.Y. May. 12, 1998)   Cited 59 times
    In Majewski the New York Court of Appeals observed that "the date that legislation is to take effect is a separate question from whether the statute should apply to claims and rights then in existence.
  10. Quarty v. U.S.

    170 F.3d 961 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 56 times
    Holding that an agency may waive compliance with a specificity requirement in a tax refund case where the agency "see fit to dispense with [its] formal requirements and to examine the merits of the claim"