United States v. James Palmieri, 46 F.3d 5 (3rd Cir. 1995). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. James Palmieri, 46 F.3d 5 (3rd Cir. 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Foregger v. Redfin Corporation (cand, 2025-07-02)
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Foregger v. Redfin Corporation
N.D. Cal. · 2025 · confidence medium
P. 8(e). “[A] pro se 2 complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal 3 pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quotation omitted). 4 Nevertheless, “pro se litigants are bound by the rules of procedure.” Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 5 52, 54 (9th Cir. 1995).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Motaz v. Larose
S.D. Cal. · 2023 · confidence medium
A court’s exercise of 4 discretion in this regard is informed by the factors outlined in Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 5 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see" Grayton v. United States Trustee
S.D. Cal. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 5 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (affirming dismissal for failure to file timely opposition papers where 6 plaintiff had notice of the motion and ample time to respond).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Demby v. Preston Trucking Co., Inc.
D. Maryland · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Podberesky v. Kirwan, 38 F.3d 147, 157 (“A district court may not resolve conflicts in the evidence on summary judgment motions....”), reh’g, en banc, denied, 46 F.3d 5 (4th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 2001 , 131 L.Ed.2d 1002 (1995).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Brumback v. Callas Contractors, Inc.
D. Maryland · 1995 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Podberesky v. Kirwan, 38 F.3d 147, 157 (“A district court may not resolve conflicts in the evidence on summary judgment motions.... ”), reh’g, en banc, denied, 46 F.3d 5 (4th Cir.1994), ce rt. denied, — U.S.-, 115 S.Ct. 2001 , 131 L.Ed.2d 1002 (1995).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America
v.
James PALMIERI, Appellant
93-5134.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Feb 10, 1995.
46 F.3d 5
Hutchinson, Cowen, Nygaard.
Published

ORDER

Appellant’s convictions are hereby vacated and the case is remanded to the district court for a new trial in accordance with the rules on specific intent enunciated by the Supreme Court in Staples v. United States, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 1793, 128 L.Ed.2d 608 (1994).