United States v. Manchester Farming P'ship, United States of Am. v. Lone Pine Land, Inc., United States of Am. v. Priest Butte Farm, Inc., 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2003). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Manchester Farming P'ship, United States of Am. v. Lone Pine Land, Inc., United States of Am. v. Priest Butte Farm, Inc., 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2003). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
30 citation events (30 in the last 25 years) across 10 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Plintron Technologies USA LLC v. Joseph Phillips, et al. (wawd, 2025-12-09)
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Plintron Technologies USA LLC v. Joseph Phillips, et al.
W.D. Wash. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Manchester Farming P’ship, 315 F.3d 1176, 1185 , 18 opinion amended on denial of reh’g, 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2003).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Terzakis
7th Cir. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Manchester Farming P’ship, 315 F.3d 1176, 1182 (9th Cir.), opinion amended on denial of reh’g, 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2003); United States v. Truesdale, 211 F.3d 898, 908 (5th Cir. 2000).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. John Terzakis
7th Cir. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Manches‐ ter Farming P’ship, 315 F.3d 1176, 1182 (9th Cir.), opinion amended on denial of reh’g, 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2003); United States v. Truesdale, 211 F.3d 898, 908 (5th Cir. 2000).
cited Cited "see" Cenex Harvest States Cooperatives v. U.S. Bank N.A.
9th Cir. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Id.
discussed Cited "see" Howard v. Bangor Hydro Electric Co. (In Re Bangor & Aroostook Railroad)
Bankr. D. Me. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ganis Credit Corp. v. Anderson (In re Jan Weilert RV, Inc.), 315 F.3d 1192, 1197 (9th Cir. 2003) (collecting cases), amended by, 326 F.3d 1028 ; see generally 5 Collier ¶ 547.04[2][a]. 14 .Some courts consider that the relevant importance of complying with "industry standards” wanes as the length of the pre-petition relationship between the debtor and the creditor lengthens.
cited Cited "see" Bryan v. Bryan
9th Cir. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Jan Weilert RV, Inc., 315 F.3d 1192, 1196 (9th Cir.), amended by 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir.2003) (bankruptcy court’s factual findings will be accepted absent clear mistake).
cited Cited "see" Holguin v. Flood Control District
9th Cir. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Jan Weilert RV, Inc., 315 F.3d 1192, 1199 (9th Cir.2003), amended by 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir.2003).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Kelly v. J.A.W. Land & Trading LLC
S.D. Cal. · 2013 · signal: see also · confidence low
Id.; see also In re Jan Weilert RV, Inc., 315 F.3d 1192, 1199 , amended, 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir.2003) (affirming the bankruptcy court’s conclusion and declining to consider issues not raised in the bankruptcy court because “[ajbsent exceptional circumstances, this court generally will not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal”); In re Am.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Manchester Farming Partnership, United States of America v. Lone Pine Land, Inc., United States of America v. Priest Butte Farm, Inc.
01-30414.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Apr 17, 2003.
326 F.3d 1028
Published

326 F.3d 1028

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MANCHESTER FARMING PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-Appellant.
United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Lone Pine Land, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.
United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Priest Butte Farm, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-30414.

No. 01-30415.

No. 01-20416.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted November 5, 2002.

Filed January 10, 2003.

Amended April 17, 2003.

Kenneth R. Olson, Great Falls, MT, for defendant-appellant Manchester Farming Partnership.

Floyd D. Corder, Corder & Allen, Great Falls, MT, for defendant-appellant Lone Pine Land, Inc.

Daniel Donovan, Thompson, Potts & Donovan, P.C., Great Falls, MT, for defendant-appellant Priest Butte Farm, Inc.

William W. Mercer, United States Attorney, District of Montana, for the plaintiff-appellee.

Carl E. Rostad, Assistant U.S. Attorney, District of Montana, for the plaintiff-appellee.

Leif M. Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, District of Montana, for the plaintiff-appellee.

John A. Drennan, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for the plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana; Edward C. Reed, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-01-00002-ECR.

Before TROTT, T.G. NELSON, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judge:

[*~1028]1

The Opinion filed January 10, 2003, slip op. 231, and appearing at 315 F.3d 1176, is amended as follows:

2

1. At slip op. 240, line 4, delete "with `deliberate indifference'" and replace with "without due care".

3

With this amendment, the panel has voted unanimously to deny the petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing.

4

The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R.App. P. 35.

[*~1029]5

The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED.