October Term 2002 · Docket 02-42
Can Nevada courts block California tax audits?
California seeks to enforce its tax laws. Hyatt argues Nevada courts should stop the process.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
California argues states may apply their own laws despite overlapping jurisdiction.
Hyatt argues Nevada courts should extend authority over the California tax process.
questions
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 7-3 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 7-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 11-13
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
California wants to collect taxes from Hyatt. Hyatt wants Nevada courts to block that collection.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 7-3 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 7-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 24, 2003.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
What each side wants
California wants to enforce its tax laws against Hyatt.
Hyatt wants Nevada courts to block the California tax process.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 7-3 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 7-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
What each side says
California argues states may apply their own laws despite overlapping jurisdiction.
Hyatt argues Nevada courts should extend authority over the California tax process.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 7-3 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 7-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the case was submitted.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 11-13
Why it matters
This dispute defines state power over tax collection. It affects how states handle overlapping legal authority.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 7-3 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 7-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 11-13
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 7-3 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 7-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 7-3 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 7-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.