green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
6.9 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 2003 ·
…gte offers no separate analysis under the state constitution. accordingly, we assume, without deciding, that the analysis is the same under article i, section 18, of the oregon constitution, and the takings clause of the fifth amendment to the constitution of the united states.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 32 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Gonzales v. Garner Food Services, Inc.
Dolge Company, Inc., 581 F.2d 1052 (2nd Cir.1978); Rutherford v. American Bank of Commerce, 565 F.2d 1162 (10th Cir.1977); but see Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 70 F.3d 325 (4th Cir.1995), cert. granted, --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 1541 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996).
discussed
Cited "but see"
Gonzales Ex Rel. Estate of Bourgeois v. Garner Food Services, Inc.
(2×)
Dolge Company, Inc., 581 F.2d 1052 (2nd Cir.1978); Rutherford v. American Bank of Commerce, 565 F.2d 1162 (10th Cir.1977); but see Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 70 F.3d 325 (4th Cir.1995), cert. granted, — U.S.-, 116 S.Ct. 1541 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996).
discussed
Cited "but see"
unempl.ins.rep. (Cch) P 15501b United States of America v. Frank Baumgardner, United States of America v. Frank Baumgardner
Raether, 82 F.3d at 194 (reviewing the error under 52(a)); but see United States v. Wells, 63 F.3d 745, 751 (8th Cir.1995) (vacating, without harmless error discussion, convictions in which the element of materiality was removed from the jury), cert. granted, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1540 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Zoeller v. United States
when the facts alleged in the complaint reveal 'any possible basis on which the non-movant might prevail, the motion must be denied.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Coast Range Conifers, LLC v. State Ex Rel. Oregon State Board of Forestry
gte offers no separate analysis under the state constitution. accordingly, we assume, without deciding, that the analysis is the same under article i, section 18, of the oregon constitution, and the takings clause of the fifth amendment to the constitution of the united states.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Freedom Socialist Party v. Bradbury
gte offers no separate analysis under the state constitution. accordingly, we assume, without deciding, that the analysis is the same under article i, section 18, of the oregon constitution, and the takings clause of the fifth amendment to the constitution of the united states.
discussed
Cited "see"
Georgeff v. United States
See Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.1995), ce rt. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996); see also Crocker v. United States, 125 F.3d 1475, 1476 (Fed.Cir.1997); Collins v. United States, 67 F.3d 284, 288 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied (1995) (citing additional cases); LeBlanc v. United States, 50 F.3d at 1028 ; Mullenberg v. United States, 857 F.2d 770, 773 (Fed.Cir.1988); Murray v. United States, 817 F.2d 1580, 1583 (Fed.Cir.1987); United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 886-87 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d…
discussed
Cited "see"
Sumter v. United States
See Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.1995), ce rt. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996); see also Crock er v. United States, 125 F.3d 1475, 1476 (Fed.Cir.1997); LeBlanc v. United States, 50 F.3d 1025, 1028 (Fed.Cir.1995); Collins v. United States, 67 F.3d 284, 288 (Fed.Cir.1995) (citing additional cases); Mullenberg v. United States, 857 F.2d 770, 773 (Fed.Cir.1988); Murray v. United States, 817 F.2d 1580, 1583 (Fed.Cir.1987); United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 886-87 (Fed.Cir.1983), ce rt. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d…
cited
Cited "see"
Novell, Inc. v. United States
See Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1101 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Hicks v. Humble Oil and Refining Co.
See Trahan v. Trahan, 894 S.W.2d 113, 118 (Tex.App.—Austin 1995, writ denied), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Harvard
See United States v. Wells, 63 F.3d 745, 750-51 (8th Cir.1995), cert. granted, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1540 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996). 7 .
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Quentin T. Wiles, United States of America v. Patrick J. Schleibaum
(3×)
See United States v. Wells, 63 F.3d 745 (8th Cir.1995), cert. granted, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1540 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Yuri D. Veprinsky v. Fluor Daniel, Inc.
(2×)
See --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 1541 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996). 29 The EEOC, which has filed a brief as a friend of the court, now asks us to overrule Reed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dyck v. Albertelli Law
Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607 , 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967)); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Waltner v. United States
Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607 , 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967)); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hernandez v. United States
Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607 , 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967)); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Moore v. United States
To prove that a statute or regulation is money mandating, plaintiff must demonstrate that an independent source of substantive law relied upon “can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damages sustained.” United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. at 217, 103 S.Ct. 2961 (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 400 , 96 S.Ct. 948 and Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607 , 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967)); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1995),…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Akinro v. United States
To prove that a statute or regulation is money mandating, plaintiff must demonstrate that an independent source of substantive law relied upon “can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Feder-al Government for the damages sustained.” United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. at 217, 103 S.Ct. 2961 (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 400 , 96 S.Ct. 948 and Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607 , 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967)); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1995)…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Modena v. Neff
To prove that a statute or regulation is money mandating, plaintiff must demonstrate that an independent source of substantive law relied upon “can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damages sustained.” United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. at 217, 103 S.Ct. 2961 (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 400 , 96 S.Ct. 948 and Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607 , 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967)); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1995),…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Brown v. United States
Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607 , 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967)); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Young v. United States
To prove that a statute or regulation is money mandating, plaintiff must demonstrate that an independent source of substantive law relied upon “can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damages sustained.” United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. at 217, 103 S.Ct. 2961 (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 400 , 96 S.Ct. 948 and Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. at 607, 372 F.2d at 1009); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community v. United States
To prove that a statute or regulation is money mandating, plaintiff must demonstrate that an independent source of substantive law relied upon “can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damages sustained.” United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. at 217, 103 S.Ct. 2961 (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 400 , 96 S.Ct. 948 and Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. at 607 , 372 F.2d at 1009 ); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. deni…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sageman v. United States
To prove that a statute or regulation is money mandating, plaintiff must demonstrate that an independent source of substantive law relied upon “can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damages sustained.” United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. at 217, 103 S.Ct. 2961 (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 400 , 96 S.Ct. 948 and Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. at 607 , 372 F.2d 1002 , 372 F.2d at 1009 ); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.), reh’g denied, en banc suggestion declined (Fed.Cir.1…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rutledge v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d at 886-87 ; see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996); Featheringill v. United States, 217 Ct.Cl. 24, 33 , 1978 WL 5755 (1978); Rosano v. United States, 9 Cl.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Tinsley v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d at 886-87 ; see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996); Featheringill v. United States, 217 Ct.Cl. 24, 33 , 1978 WL 5755 (1978); Rosano v. United States, 9 Cl.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nalette v. States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d at 886-87 ; see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996); Featheringill ¶.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Beach v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d at 886-87 ; see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996); Featheringill v. United States, 217 Ct.Cl. 24, 33 , 1978 WL 5755 (1978); Rosano v. United States, 9 Cl.Ct. 137, 142 (1985), aff'd, 800 F.2d 1126 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ogden v. United States
See United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 886-87 (Fed.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1065 , 104 S.Ct. 1414 , 79 L.Ed.2d 740 (1984); see also Hamlet v. United States, 63 F.3d 1097, 1107 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1155 , 116 S.Ct. 1542 , 134 L.Ed.2d 646 (1996); Featheringill v. United States, 217 Ct.Cl. 24, 33 , 1978 WL 5755 (1978); Rosano v. United States, 9 Cl.Ct. 137, 142 (1985), aff'd, 800 F.2d 1126 (Fed.Cir.1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 907 , 107 S.Ct. 1350 , 94 L.Ed.2d 521 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kasza v. Browner
See, e.g., Black v. United States, 62 F.3d 1115 (8th Cir.1995), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1541 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996); Zuckerbraun v. General Dynamics Corp., 935 F.2d 544 (2d Cir.1991); Fitzgerald v. Penthouse Int’l, Ltd., 776 F.2d 1236 (4th Cir.1985); Molerio, 749 F.2d at 819, 822 ; Farnsworth Cannon, Inc. v. Grimes, 635 F.2d 268, 281 (4th Cir.1980) (en banc).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Stella Kasza and John Does v. Carol M. Browner, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Stella Kasza and John Does, Plaintiffs-Appellants/cross-Appellees v. Carol M. Browner, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant. Helen Frost John Does v. William Perry, Secretary of United States Department of Defense Anthony Lake Sheila Widnall, Helen Frost John Does v. William J. Perry, Secretary of United States Department of Defense Anthony Lake Sheila Widnall, Stella Kasza and John Does v. Carol M. Browner, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Stella Kasza and John Does v. Carol M. Browner, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Helen Frost John Does v. William J. Perry, Secretary of United States Department of Defense Anthony Lake Sheila Widnall
See, e.g., Black v. United States, 62 F.3d 1115 (8th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1154 , 116 S.Ct. 1541 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996); Zuckerbraun v. General Dynamics Corp., 935 F.2d 544 (2d Cir.1991); Fitzgerald v. Penthouse Int'l, Ltd., 776 F.2d 1236 (4th Cir.1985); Molerio, 749 F.2d at 819, 822 ; Farnsworth Cannon, Inc. v. Grimes, 635 F.2d 268, 281 (4th Cir.1980) (en banc). 36 Likewise, explaining through a competent official such as Moorman how the claim of privilege plays out in practice is consistent with Reynolds 's insistence that the decision to object be made at the highest level.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jones v. Wellham
See, e.g., Brown v. Bryan County, 67 F.3d 1174 , 1183-85 (5th Cir.1995) (municipal liability based upon decision by sheriff to hire deputy with known record of violence who later committed excessive force violation in arrest), cert. granted, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1540 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (U.S. Apr. 22, 1996) (No. 95-1100); Graham v. Sauk Prairie Police Comm’n, 915 F.2d 1085 , 1104 (7th Cir.1990) (decision by municipal police commission to hire psychologically troubled police officer who later shot arrestee could give rise to municipal liability if commission aware of psychological problems); P…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Astra U.S.A., Inc.
Compare Charlton v. Paramus Bd. of Educ., 25 F.3d 194, 198-200 (3d Cir.), cert. denied,-U.S.-, 115 S.Ct. 590 , 130 L.Ed.2d 503 (1994) (Title VII protects former employees), with Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 70 F.3d 325, 330 (4th Cir.1995), cert. granted, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1541 , 134 L.Ed.2d 645 (1996) (Title VII's anti-retaliation provisions do not extend to post-employment retaliation). 7 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
640 Broadway Renaissance Co.
v.
Eisner
v.
Eisner
No. 95-959.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 22, 1996.
Published
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Oregon (2) · Federal Claims (1)
App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.