green
Positive treatment
21.7 score
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Batoh v. McNeil-PPC, Inc.
See, e.g., Bonkowski v. Oberg Indus., Inc., 787 F.3d 190, 199 (3d Cir.2015) (“In interpreting a federal regulation, we look to well-established principles of statutory interpretation”); Ber gmann v. C.I.R., 552 Fed.Appx. 673, 674 (9th Cir.2014) (“the principles of statutory interpretation apply equally to regulatory interpretation”) (citing Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 967 (9th Cir.2001), aff'd, 537 U.S. 437 , 123 S.Ct. 1099 , 155 L.Ed.2d 17 (2003)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
California Foundation for Independent Living Centers v. County of Sacramento
In this situation, “the principles of statutory interpretation apply equally to regulatory interpretation —” Bergmann v. C.I.R., 552 Fed.Appx. 673, 674 (9th Cir.2014) (unpublished) (citing Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 967 (9th Cir.2001), aff'd, 537 U.S. 437 , 123 S.Ct. 1099 , 155 L.Ed.2d 17 (2003)); see also Aguayo v. U.S. Bank, 653 F.3d 912, 925 (9th Cir.2011) (“Because [the regulations in question] carry the same weight as federal statutes, this interpretation rule is equally applicable here.”).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Estate of Gertrude Saunders v. Cir
Corp. v. Comm’r, 376 F.3d 1015, 1021 (9th Cir.2004) (citing Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 962 (9th Cir.2001)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bergmann v. Commissioner
However, the principles of statutory interpretation apply equally to regulatory interpretation, Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 967 (9th Cir.2001), affd, 537 U.S. 437 , 123 S.Ct. 1099 , 155 L.Ed.2d 17 (2003), and do not support that conclusion.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Fox Insurance Company, Inc. v. Centers for Medicare and Medic
Barboza v. Cal. Ass’n of Prof'l Firefighters, 651 F.3d 1073 , 1078 (9th Cir.2011); Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 967 (9th Cir.2001).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Barboza v. CAL. ASS'N OF PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS
Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 967 (9th Cir.2001).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Barboza v. California Ass'n of Professional Firefighters
Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 967 (9th Cir.2001).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
At & T Communications of CaliFornia, Inc. v. Pac-West Telecomm, Inc.
See McClellan, 508 F.3d at 1250 ; Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 967 (9th Cir.2001) ("[T]enets of statutory construction apply with equal force to the interpretation of regulations.” (citation omitted)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Ronald Moran Cadillac, Inc. v. United States
Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 962 (9th Cir.2001).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Company and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Reg. § 1.832-4 , an issue of law we review de novo, Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 962 (9th Cir.2001), deferring to the Commissioner’s interpretation so long as it is reasonable.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
MN Lawyers Mutual v. CIR
Reg. § 1.832-4 , an issue of law we review de novo, Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 962 (9th Cir. 2001), deferring to the Commissioner's interpretation so long as it is reasonable.
discussed
Cited "see"
Center for Biological Diversit v. Ken Salazar
See Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 967 (9th Cir. 2001) (explaining that a court must construe regulations so as to give effect to each provision).
cited
Cited "see"
Metro Leasing and Development Corporation East Bay Chevrolet Company, a Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
See Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 962 (9th Cir. 2001).
cited
Cited "see"
Boise Cascade Corporation v. United States
See Boeing Co. v. United States, 258 F.3d 958, 962-63 (9th Cir.2001).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Shirley Breeden
v.
Clark County School District
v.
Clark County School District
99-15522.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Aug 2, 2001.
Published
258 F.3d 958 (9th Cir. 2001)
SHIRLEY BREEDEN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
No. 99-15522
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
August 2, 2001
D.C. No. CV-97-365-DWH(RJJ)
Before: William C. Canby, Jr., Stephen Reinhardt, and Ferdinand F. Fernandez, Circuit Judges.
[*~958]1
On Remand from the United States Supreme Court
ORDER
[*~967]2
Pursuant to the mandate of the Supreme Court in Clark County School District v. Breeden, 121 S.Ct. 1508 (2001), the order of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant is affirmed.