green
Positive treatment
Hot · 62 in 5y
Quoted verbatim 5×
94.7 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case ·
…he change in the parties' legal relationship must be the product of judicial action.
at p. 228
⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases ·
…plaintiff does not become a 'prevailing party' solely because his lawsuit causes a voluntary change in the defendant's conduct.
at p. 228
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2011
2018
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
MAZZONI CENTER v. LCF GROUP, INC.
he plaintiff in need only to show a likelihood of success on the merits (that is, a reasonable chance, or probability, of winning) to be granted relief. a likelihood does not mean more likely than not.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Annette Sutton v. Plainfield Board of Education
(2×)
he change in the parties' legal relationship must be the product of judicial action.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Berkemeier, an individual and former Chairman of City Building Code Board of Appeals v. City of Jackson, a municipal corporation
emporary restraining orders may be issued with little or no notice and may dissolve on their own accord.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Providence Pediatric Medical DayCare Inc. v. Alaigh
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
plaintiff does not become a 'prevailing party' solely because his lawsuit causes a voluntary change in the defendant's conduct.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Providence Pediatric Medical D v. Poonam Alaigh
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
plaintiff does not become a 'prevailing party' solely because his lawsuit causes a voluntary change in the defendant's conduct.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In re: Jayadeep R Deshmukh
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Lennox AES Holdings LLC and Lennox AES Industries LLC v. Jason Benton
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Genomic Prediction, Inc. v. Nathan Treff, et al.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011). “[W]hether a party has met this threshold will necessarily vary with the circumstances of each case.” Fres-co Sys.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In re: AIO US, INC, et al.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011). 17 In re MTE Holdings, LLC, No. 19-12269, 2021 WL 4203339 , at *3 (Bankr.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Maya Stephens v. Gateway School District, et al.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc); and citing Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (“It is not enough that the chance of success on the merits be better than negligible[,]” and “more than a mere ‘possibility’ of relief is required.”)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
DESHMUKH v. UNITED STATES TRUSTEE OFFICE
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Sharonda Harris
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
COCKERILL v. CORTEVA, INC.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
ZHANG v. AAGGO
Consultants v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc) (emphasis in original).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
CHEN v. ADEDIY
Consultants v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc) (emphasis in original).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
O'REGAN v. CENTRAL BUCKS SCHOOL DISTRICT
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Anash, Inc. v. Borough of Kingston
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
GREAT LAKES DREDGE & DOCK COMPANY, LLC v. PHILLY SHIPYARD, INC.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Carty v. Testamark
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
EXPERIOR GLOBAL WAREHOUSING, LLC v. BTC III HAMILTON DC LLC
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
DOE v. PINE-RICHLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT
Consultants v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc) (emphasis in original).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
The Diocese of Camden, New Jersey
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Suzanne N. Strickler
A bankruptcy court may dismiss a case with prejudice to the filing of a subsequent petition for “cause.”52 “Cause” includes a lack of good faith,53 which may be demonstrated by a record of abusive serial filings.54 On appeal, factual findings are reviewed for clear error while the imposition of a filing bar is reviewed for abuse of discretion.55 A bankruptcy court abuses its discretion when its ruling rests upon an error of law or a misapplication of law to the facts.56 In other words, “[a] court may not issue orders that are ‘arbitrary or irrational.’”57 The Debtor’s asserti…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
MCLEOD v. UPMC CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURG
(2×)
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
BROWN v. FALVEY
(2×)
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Official Committee Of Unsecured Creditors v. BlockFi Inc.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
AFG MEDIA LTD v. POPTREND-OFFICIAL
Consultants v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc) (emphasis in original).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
HOENIG v. NASCO HEALTHCARE, INC.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 228 (3d Cir. 2011).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
SU v. COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC
Consultants v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc) (emphasis in original).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh PA v. Boy Scouts of America & Delaware BSA LLC
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
NEW JERSEY BANKERS ASSOCIATION v. GREWAL
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 228 (3d Cir. 2011).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
ESTATE OF CLARA T. TROILO v. ROSE TREE PLACE
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (discussing the “merits” requirement in the context of temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
DROSOS & ASSOCIATES, PC v. TD BANK NA
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc)). “[W]hether a party has met this threshold will necessarily vary with the circumstances of each case.” Fres-co Sys.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
DEFOGGI v. N'DIAYE
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
ORIENT TURISTIK MAGAZACILIK SAN VE TIC LTD. STI v. AYTEK USA, INC.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
A.P.I. INC. v. BROADWAY ELECTRIC SERVICE CORPORATION
Consultants v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc) (emphasis in original).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Boynes v. Limetree Bay Ventures, LLC
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc), “more than a mere possibility of relief is required,” which means that Plaintiffs’ “chance of success on the merits [must] be better than negligible.” Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009) (internal quotations omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
SHREENATH HOLDING LLC v. BENZER
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Miller v. Mott
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011). fraudulent conveyance claim, he must prove that these transfers made to purchase the real properties and the cash transfers were made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Team Systems International, LLC
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011). fraudulent conveyance claim, he must prove that these transfers made to purchase the real properties and the cash transfers were made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
John Doe 1 v. Upper Saint Clair School District
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc) (citing People Against Police Violence v. City of Pittsburgh, 520 F.3d 226, 229 (3d Cir. 2008)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
John Doe 1 v. North Allegheny School District
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc) (citing People Against Police Violence v. City of Pittsburgh, 520 F.3d 226, 229 (3d Cir. 2008)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. 710 LONG RIDGE ROAD OPERATING COMPANY II, LLC
(2×)
Consultants, 650 F.3d at 229; see also Wash. Metro.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
DOE 1 v. PERKIOMEN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT
(3×)
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 228 (3d Cir. 2011) (ellipsis in original) (quoting Tex. State Teachers Ass’n v. Garland Indep.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re: Mumma BK appeal
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Golden Fortune Import & Export Corp v. Mei-Xin Limited
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re: MD Helicopters, Inc.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
NOT AN LLC v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES
Consultants v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011) (en banc).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Kimmel's Coal and Packaging, Inc.
Consultants, Inc. v. Milgram, 650 F.3d 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2011)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Singer Management Consultants, Inc.
v.
Milgram
v.
Milgram
09-2238.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Sep 1, 2010.
Published
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 09-2238
SINGER MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS, INC.; LIVE GOLD OPERATIONS, INC., Appellants. v. ANNE MILGRAM, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey
PRESENT: McKEE, Chief Judge, SLOVITER, SCIRICA, RENDELL, BARRY, AMBRO, FUENTES, SMITH, FISHER, CHAGARES, JORDAN, HARDIMAN, GREENAWAY, VANASKIE and ALDISERT 1 ROTH 2, Circuit Judges
ORDER
A majority of the active judges having voted for rehearing en banc in the above
captioned case, it is ordered that the petition for rehearing is GRANTED. The Clerk of this Court shall list the case for rehearing en banc at the convenience of the Court. The opinion and judgment entered August 5, 2010, are hereby vacated.
By the Court, /s/ Theodore A. McKee
Chief Circuit Judge
Date: September 1, 2010 tyw/cc: William L. Charron, Esq. Jeffrey A. Koziar, Esq.
1 W ill participate as a member of the en banc court pursuant to 3d Cir. I.O.P. 9.6.4. 2 W ill participate as a member of the en banc court pursuant to 3d Cir. I.O.P. 9.6.4.