green
Positive treatment
4.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1993
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Turner v. Massiah
La.R.S. 40:1299.42(B)(1) and (3)(b); Butler v. Flint Goodrich Hosp., 607 So.2d 517 (La.1992), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed.2d 249 *641 (1993); Descant v. Adm'rs of Tulane Educ.
discussed
Cited "see"
St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. v. Eusea
See Butler v. Flint Goodrich Hospital of Dillard University, 607 So.2d 517, 521 (La.1992), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 909 , 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed.2d 249 (1993), (three effects of the Act inuring to the benefit of patients severely injured by medical malpractice are: greater likelihood that the offending physician or other health care provider has malpractice insurance; greater assurance of collection from a solvent fund; and payment of all medical care and related benefits).
discussed
Cited "see"
Williams v. State, Dept. of Health and Hospitals
See Chamberlain, 624 So.2d at 882 . [2] (Sibley I), 462 So.2d 149 , vacated on reh'g, (Sibley II), 477 So.2d 1094 (La.1985). [3] 607 So.2d 517 (La.1992), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 909 , 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed.2d 249 (1993). [4] The court held that the $500,000.00 statutory cap on general damages in a medical malpractice suit against multiple defendants does not violate equal protection provisions of the State or Federal Constitutions.
cited
Cited "see"
Addeo v. Braver
See Burke v. Jacoby, 981 F.2d 1372, 1378 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 909 , 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed.2d 249 (1993).
cited
Cited "see"
Strasenburgh v. Straubmuller
Accord, Burke v. Jacoby, 981 F. 2d 1372, 1374 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed. 2d 249 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
Coan v. Andersen (In Re Andersen)
Vezzetti v. Pellegrini, 22 F.3d 483, 485 (2d Cir.1994); see Burke v. Jacoby, 981 F.2d 1372, 1379 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed.2d 249 (1993) (“When a defendant has moved for summary judgment on the ground that undisputed facts reveal that the plaintiff cannot establish an essential element of the claim, on which element the plaintiff has the burden of proof, and the plaintiff has failed to come forth with evidence sufficient to permit a reasonable juror to return a verdict in his or her favor on that element, summary judgment should be granted.”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mills v. Polar Molecular Corp.
See Burke v. Jacoby, 981 F.2d 1372, 1378 (2d Cir.1992) (a 10b-5 plaintiff must demonstrate that he relied on the defendant’s false statements when he entered the transaction), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed.2d 249 (1993); Weiss v. Wittcoff, 966 F.2d 109, 111 (2d Cir.1992) (the plaintiff must show, that the defendant’s misrepresentations caused the plaintiff to invest).
discussed
Cited "see"
William L. Mills v. Polar Molecular Corporation, Otis L. Nelson, Mark L. Nelson, A. Richard Nelson, James E. Larson, Eugene Zwoyer, Kenneth A. Roe and Thomas Ryan, Chester J. Walsh, Ronald L. Krumm, T v. Miles and Joseph Mello v. Polar Molecular Corporation, Otis L. Nelson, Mark L. Nelson, A. Richard Nelson, James E. Larson and Eugene Zwoyer
See Burke v. Jacoby, 981 F.2d 1372, 1378 (2d Cir.1992) (a 10b-5 plaintiff must demonstrate that he relied on the defendant's false statements when he entered the transaction), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed.2d 249 (1993); Weiss v. Wittcoff, 966 F.2d 109, 111 (2d Cir.1992) (the plaintiff must show that the defendant's misrepresentations caused the plaintiff to invest).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Robinson v. Allen Parish Police Jury
As we have observed on numerous occasions, the legislature enacted the Medical Malpractice Act in 1975 in response to a "perceived medical malpractice insurance `crisis.'" Hutchinson v. Patel, 93-2156 (La.5/23/94), 637 So.2d 415, 419 ; see also Butler v. Flint Goodrich *538 Hosp., 607 So.2d 517, 521 (La. 1992)[, cert. denied, 508 U.S. 909 , 113 S.Ct. 2338 , 124 L.Ed.2d 249 (1993)]; Galloway v. Baton Rouge Gen.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Grace v. Rosenstock
Insofar as the element of causation is concerned, we have held in a variety of contexts that in order to establish a prima facie case under Rule 10b-5, a plaintiff must show, inter alia, both “loss causation — that the misrepresentations or omissions caused the economic harm,” and “transaction causation — that the violations in question caused the [plaintiff] to engage in the transaction in question.” Bennett v. United States Trust Co. of New York, 770 F.2d 308, 313 (2d Cir.1985) (internal quotation marks omitted) (emphases in original) (alleged misrepresentation as to margin rules…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Steinbergh
v.
City of Cambridge, Massachusetts
v.
City of Cambridge, Massachusetts
No. 92-1493.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 17, 1993.
Published
Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.