green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
6.8 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1994 ·
…evidence that the delay precipitated engineering or design problems that called for central staff consideration will suffice to satisfy the burden of proving an increase in overhead.
at p. 1033
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Thalle Construction Co., Inc. v. The Whiting-Turner Contracting Company, Inc.
evidence that the delay precipitated engineering or design problems that called for central staff consideration will suffice to satisfy the burden of proving an increase in overhead.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Thalle Construction Co. v. Whiting-Turner Contracting Co.
evidence that the delay precipitated engineering or design problems that called for central staff consideration will suffice to satisfy the burden of proving an increase in overhead.
discussed
Cited "see"
Akinlawon v. Polanco
Mar. 29, 2016) (finding that, “[i]n alleging that [defendants] recklessly failed to provide [plaintiff] with any medical treatment, the Second Amended Complaint puts forth a plausible claim of deliberate indifference” (internal citations, quotation marks, and alterations omitted)); see Harding v. Kuhlmann, 588 F. Supp. 1315, 1316 (S.D.N.Y. 1984) (“Deliberate indifference, the second essential element, is properly pleaded by allegations,” inter alia, “of ‘complete denial’ of medical treatment . . . .”), aff’d, 762 F.2d 990 (2d Cir. 1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
TGG Ultimate Holdings, Inc. v. Hollett
(2×)
See S. Leo Harmonay, Inc. 597 F.Supp. at 1025 (S.D.N.Y. 1984), aff'd 762 F.2d 990 (2d Cir. 1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Peterson v. Scully
See Harding v. Kuhlmann, 588 F.Supp. 1315 (S.D.N.Y.1984) (Weinfeld, J.), aff'd, 762 F.2d 990 (2d Cir.1985).
cited
Cited "see"
McCloud v. Delaney
See Harding v. Kuhlmann, 588 F.Supp. 1315 (S.D.N.Y.1984), aff’d, 762 F.2d 990 (2d Cir.1985). 9 .
cited
Cited "see"
DSC Industries, Inc. v. Robert Sagot, Inc. (In Re DSC Industries, Inc.)
See S. Leo Harmonay, Inc. v. Binks Manufacturing Co., 597 F.Supp. 1014, 1032-33 (S.D.N.Y.1984), aff'd per curiam, 762 F.2d 990 (2d Cir.1985); E.C.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. McWilliams
See DiBella v. County of Suffolk, 574 F.Supp. 151, 154 (E.D.N.Y.1983), aff'd., 762 F.2d 990 (2d Cir.1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dean v. Coughlin
See Harding v. Kuhlmann, 588 F.Supp. 1315, 1316 (S.D.N.Y.1984) (to make a claim under the Eighth Amendment, plaintiff must show allegations of serious medical needs and deliberate indifference on the part of the prison officials to those needs) (Weinfeld, J.), aff'd, 762 F.2d 990 (2d Cir.1985).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lipton
v.
Cummings
v.
Cummings
84-2238.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Mar 6, 1985.
762 F.2d 990
Published
Lipton
v.
Cummings
84-2238
United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.
3/6/85
1
W.D.N.Y.
AFFIRMED