In re Palliser is a Supreme Court of Canada case from 1978. The case involved a dispute between the Palliser family and the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) over the taxation of a trust fund set up by the family. The Pallisers argued that the trust fund should not be taxed as it was set up for the benefit of their children and grandchildren. The CRA argued that the trust fund should be taxed as it was set up for the benefit of the Palliser family. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in favour of the Pallisers, finding that the trust fund was not taxable as it was set up for the benefit of the Palliser family's children and grandchildren. The Court held that the trust fund was not a "business" and that the Pallisers had not set it up for the purpose of making a profit. The Court also held that the trust fund was not a "gift" as it was set up for the benefit of the Palliser family's children and grandchildren. The Court concluded that the trust fund was not taxable and that the Palliser family was entitled to the tax exemption.

In the case of In re Palliser, Justice Field wrote a dissenting opinion. He argued that the court should not have granted habeas corpus relief to the petitioner because he was convicted in accordance with state law and had exhausted all his remedies under state law. Furthermore, Justice Field argued that Congress did not intend for federal courts to interfere with state criminal proceedings through habeas corpus petitions when there is no violation of constitutional rights or other federal laws. He further stated that if Congress wanted such interference it would have explicitly provided for it in its legislation. Finally, Justice Field noted that granting habeas corpus relief could lead to chaos as states would be unable to enforce their own laws without fear of interference from federal courts on behalf of prisoners who had already been convicted according to those same laws.