Legal Opinion

Limtiaco v. Camacho

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided March 27, 2007No. 06-116PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Thomas

The Legislature of Guam authorized Guam’s Governor to issue bonds to fund the Territory’s continuing obligations. Concluding that the bonds would violate the debt-limitation provision of the Organic Act of Guam, §11, 64 Stat. 387, as amended, 48 U. S. C. § 1423a, the attorney general1 of Guam refused to sign contracts necessary to issue the bonds. In response, the Governor sought a declaration from the Guam Supreme Court that issuance of the bonds would not violate the Organic Act’s debt limitation. The Guam Supreme Court held that § 1423a limits Guam’s allowed indebtedness to 10 percent of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hibbs v. WinnSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Pernell v. Southall RealtySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Missouri v. JenkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  4. Morse v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  5. N. W. Halsey & Co. v. City of Belle PlaineSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. SILVA-TREVINOBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2015
  2. Bank of Guam v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
  3. Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  4. Barber v. RitterSupreme Court of Colorado · 2008
  5. National Credit Union Administration Board v. Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API