green
Positive treatment
6.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Mitchell v. Aetna Life Insurance
(2×)
Plaintiffs only potential remedy is a writ of mandamus compelling the Commissioner to withdraw her approval; section 10291.5 does not enable plaintiff “to maintain a private action against [Defendant] to rewrite the terms of his policy.” Id. at 411.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Firestone v. Acuson Corp. Long Term Disability Plan
(2×)
Plaintiffs only potential remedy is a writ of mandamus compelling *1051 the Commissioner to withdraw her approval; section 10291.5 does not enable plaintiff “to maintain a private action against [Liberty] to rewrite the terms of his policy.” Id. at 411.
discussed
Cited "see"
Prystash v. State
(2×)
See Martinez v. State, 899 S.W.2d 655, 657 (Tex.Crim.App.1994), ce rt. denied, 516 U.S. 942 , 116 S.Ct. 378 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Von Eiff v. Azicri
See Brooks v. Parkerson, 265 Ga. 189 , 454 S.E.2d 769 (Ga.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995); Hawk v. Hawk, 855 S.W.2d 573 (Tenn.1993); Williams v. Williams, 24 Va.App. 778 , 485 S.E.2d 651 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Staton
See United States v. Brown, 49 F.3d 1162, 1169 (6th Cir.) (knowledge of executing officer “is a factor which may cure any insufficiencies in the search warrant’s description of the premises”), ce rt. denied, — U.S.-, 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995); United States v. Gahagan, 865 F.2d 1490, 1499 (6th Cir.) (“when one of the executing officers is the affiant who describes the property to the judge, and the judge finds probable cause to search the property as described by the affi-ant, and the search is confined to the areas which the affiant described, then the search ... is in …
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Kenneth Joseph Hill
See United States v. Armstrong, 48 F.3d 1508 (9th Cir.), cert. granted, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Thomas J. Frisby v. United States
See United States v. Brown, 49 F.3d 1162, 1169 (6th Cir.) (seizure of Ku Klux Klan publications that were relevant to criminal investigation and specified in search warrant violated neither the First nor the Fourth Amendment), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lane v. Lane
See Brooks v. Parkerson, 265 Ga. 189 , 454 S.E.2d 769 (holding grandparent visitation statute to be unconstitutional), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995); but see Campbell v. Campbell, 896 P.2d 635 (Utah Ct.App.1995) (refusing to follow Brooks). 15.
cited
Cited "see"
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee v. Reno
See United States v. Armstrong, 48 F.3d 1508, 1513 (9th Cir.1995) (en banc), cert. granted, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Sanders v. Parrish
See also United States v. Brown, 49 F.3d 1162 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 942 , 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Moriarty v. Bradt
(2×)
See, e.g., Brooks v. Parkerson, 265 Ga. 189 , 454 S.E. 2d 769 , 773 n. 5 (Ga.) ("[T]he `best interest of the child' standard does not come into play to permit interference with the custody and control of the child, over parental objection, unless and until there is a showing of harm to the child without that interference."), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 942 , 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed. 2d 301 (1995); In re Herbst, 971 P. 2d *219 395, 399 (Okla.1998) ("To reach the issue of a child's best interests, there must be a requisite showing of harm, or threat of harm....
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re the Adoption of a Child by W.P.
(2×)
See, e.g., Brooks v. Parkerson, 265 Ga. 189 , 454 S.E. 2d 769, 773-74 (Ga.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 942 , 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed. 2d 301 (1995) (finding statute unconstitutional "under both the state and federal constitutions because it does not clearly promote the health or welfare of the child and does not require a showing of harm before state interference is authorized"); Williams v. Williams, 24 Va.App. 778 , 485 S.E. 2d 651, 654 (1997), aff'd as modified, 256 Va. 19 , 501 S.E. 2d 417 (1998) (Virginia statute's best interests test insufficient to protect parental right to autonomy in ch…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Cunningham
See, e.g., United States v. Brown, 49 F.3d 1162, 1168-69 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 377 , 133 L.Ed.2d 301 (1995); United States v. Owens, 848 F.2d 462, 465 (4th Cir. 1988); United States v. Bentley, 825 F.2d 1104, 1109 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 901 , 108 S.Ct. 240 , 98 L.Ed.2d 198 (1987); United States v. Turner, 770 F.2d 1508, 1511 (9th Cir.1985).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mears
v.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Liquidating Agent/Receiver of Olympic International Bank & Trust Co.
v.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Liquidating Agent/Receiver of Olympic International Bank & Trust Co.
No. 95-133.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 30, 1995.
Published
App. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.