green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.1 score
“when a statute is a part of a larger act ... the starting point for ascertaining legislative intent is to look to other sections of the act in pari materia with the statute under review.”
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Lopez
when a statute is a part of a larger act ... the starting point for ascertaining legislative intent is to look to other sections of the act in pari materia with the statute under review.
discussed
Cited "see"
Fletcher v. Atex, Inc.
See Phoenix Canada Oil Co. v. Texaco, 842 F.2d 1466 , 1476 (3d Cir.1988) (declining to pierce the corporate veil where subsidiary required to secure approval from parent for “large investments and acquisitions or disposals of major assets”), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 908 , 109 S.Ct. 259 , 102 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988); Akzona, 607 F.Supp. at 237 (same, where parent approval required for expenditures exceeding $850,000); Japan Petrol., 456 F.Supp. at 843 (finding no parent liability where parent approval required for expenditures exceeding $250,000).
discussed
Cited "see"
prod.liab.rep. (Cch) P 14,358 Marianne E. Fletcher, Nancy L. Bartley, Raphael Paganelli, and Charlotte Evans v. Atex, Inc., Eastman Kodak Company, and Jenny L. Hermanson and Christy Scattarella v. 805 Middlesex Corp., F/k/a Atex, Inc., and Apple Computers, Inc., Eastman Kodak Company
See Phoenix Canada Oil Co. v. Texaco, 842 F.2d 1466 , 1476 (3d Cir.1988) (declining to pierce the corporate veil where subsidiary required to secure approval from parent for "large investments and acquisitions or disposals of major assets"), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 908 , 109 S.Ct. 259 , 102 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988); Akzona, 607 F.Supp. at 237 (same, where parent approval required for expenditures exceeding $850,000); Japan Petrol., 456 F.Supp. at 843 (finding no parent liability where parent approval required for expenditures exceeding $250,000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Felton v. Brown
See Linquist v. Bowen, 839 F.2d 1321, 1323 (8th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 908 , 109 S.Ct. 259 , 102 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988); Baker v. Bowen, 839 F.2d 1075, 1080 (5th Cir.1988); Petition of Hill, 775 F.2d 1037 , 1041 (9th Cir.1985); Grace v. Burger, 763 F.2d 457, 459 (D.C.Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1026 , 106 S.Ct. 583 , 88 L.Ed.2d 565 (1985); McQuiston v. Marsh, 707 F.2d 1082, 1085 (Fed.Cir.1983); see also Hyatt v. Shalala, 6 F.3d 250, 253-54 (4th Cir.1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hillsborough Holdings Corp. v. Celotex Corp. (In Re Hillsborough Holdings Corp.)
See Phoenix Canada Oil Co., Ltd. v. Texaco, Inc., 842 F.2d 1466 (3d Cir.) cert. denied, 488 U.S. 908 , 109 S.Ct. 259 , 102 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988) (subsidiaries were “required to secure approval from their parent corporations for large investments and acquisitions or disposal of major assets”); Craig v. Lake Asbestos of Quebec, Ltd., 843 F.2d 145 (3d Cir.1988) (“widespread involvement” in financial and management decisions, including “close scrutiny of new capital expenditure projects,” did not rise to high standard of domination required to pierce the veil); Quarles v. Fuqua Industries…
discussed
Cited "see"
Hess v. LG Balfour Co., Inc.
See Phoenix Canada Oil Co. v. Texaco Inc., 842 F.2d 1466 , 1477 (3rd Cir.1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 908 , 109 S.Ct. 259 , 102 L.Ed.2d 247 (1988) (when one corporation acts as agent of disclosed principal corporation, latter corporation may be liable on contract made by agent); and Conniff v. Dodd, Mead & Co., 593 F.Supp. 266, 269 (S.D.N.Y. 1984) (parent corporation may interfere with contract between subsidiary and plaintiff only if parent does not use illegal means or is not motivated by malice).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Johnson
The proscribed conduct and the protected right must be distinguished for “it has never been deemed an abridgment of freedom of speech or press to make a course of conduct illegal merely because the conduct was in part initiated, evidenced, or carried out by means of language, either spoken, written or printed.” Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn., 436 U.S. 447, 456 , 98 S.Ct. 1912, 1918 , 56 L.Ed.2d 444 (1978) quoting Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co., 336 U.S. 490, 502 , 69 S.Ct. 684, 691 , 93 L.Ed. 834 (1949); See also, United States v. Morison, 844 F.2d 1057, 1068-69 (4 Cir.), cert. denie…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Matos
v.
LeFevre, Superintendent, Clinton Correctional Facility
v.
LeFevre, Superintendent, Clinton Correctional Facility
No. 88-146.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 17, 1988.
Published
Citer courts: E.D. Virginia (1)
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.