green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
8.0 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1997 ·
…the jurisdictional bar may be raised by public disclosure unaccompanied by an explicit allegation of fraud
at p. 741
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
United States Ex Rel. Dunleavy v. County of Delaware
the jurisdictional bar may be raised by public disclosure unaccompanied by an explicit allegation of fraud
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States Ex Rel. Mikes v. Straus
disagreements over scientific methodology do not give rise to false claims act liability
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. County of Delaware
the jurisdictional bar may be raised by public disclosure unaccompanied by an explicit allegation of fraud
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Alcan Electrical & Engineering, Inc.
See Hagood v. Sonoma County Water Agency, 81 F.3d 1465, 1474 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 865 , 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996); see also Sandia, 70 F.3d at 572 .
cited
Cited "see"
Sheldon Debs v. Northeastern Illinois University and Board of Governors of State Colleges and Universities
See Wolf v. Buss America, Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 923 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Sidney v. Humana Health Care Plan, Inc.
See Wolf v. Buss America, Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 918 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Sanders v. Women's Treatment Center
See Wolf v. Buss America, Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 918 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Hugley v. Art Institute of Chicago
See Wolf v. Buss America, Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 918 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Hubbard v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Ass'n
See Wolf v. Buss America, Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 918 (7th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Vallabhapurapu v. First National Bank
See Wolf v. Buss America, Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 918 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Nicholas A. CHIARAMONTE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FASHION BED GROUP, INC., a DIVISION OF LEGGETT & PLATT, INC., Defendant-Appellee
See Wolf v. Buss America, Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 923 (7th Cir.1996), cert. denied — U.S. —, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Will BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERITECH CORP., Defendant-Appellee
See Wolf v. Buss (America), Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 919-20 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S.-, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Brown
(2×)
See Holt v. United States, 675 A.2d 474, 482-83 (D.C.) (finding no undue suggestivity where officer shot suspect and then identified suspect in hospital where suspect had sought treatment after fleeing officer), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 176 , 136 L.Ed.2d 117 (1996); Garris v. United States, 559 A.2d 323, 327 (D.C.1989) (finding no undue suggestivity from showup where suspect in handcuffs was identified at scene of crime twenty-four hours later).
cited
Cited "see"
Lora S. Ilhardt v. Sara Lee Corporation, a Maryland Corporation
See Wolf v. Buss America, Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 919 (7th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996), citing Dale v. Chicago Tribune Co., 797 F.2d 458, 464 (7th Cir.1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Andrew Sledd v. Guy Linsday
See Wolf v. Buss (America) Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 922 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996); Midwest Imports, 71 F.3d at 1313 ; Highlands Ins.
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Shulick v. PaineWebber, Inc.
(4×)
See also Dahl v. Charles Schwab & Co., 545 N.W.2d 918 (Minn.1996) (federal preemption precludes state from imposing requirement that investors consent to broker’s receipt of order flow payments, since such a requirement would frustrate the objectives of the SEC under Rule 10b-10), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 866 , 117 S.Ct. 176 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Papenthien v. Papenthien
One exception is if “the evidence on remand is substantially different.” Id.; see also Hagood v. *1239 Sonoma County Water Agency, 81 F.3d 1465, 1473 (9th Cir.) (holding that a district court properly revisited a matter decided on appeal because “new evidence warranted reconsideration of the question by the district court on remand”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996); cf. Cardwell v. Kurtz, 765 F.2d 776, 778 (9th Cir.1985) (holding that the district court properly declined to revisit a matter decided on appeal because the litigants had presented no new e…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Echols v. Select Beverages, Inc.
Chiaramonte v. Fashion Bed Group, Inc., 129 F.3d 391, 398 (7th Cir.1997); See also Wolf v. Buss Am., Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 923 (7th Cir.1996) cert. de nied, 519 U.S. 866 , 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Arnold v. Rayonier, Inc.
See also Wolf v. Buss (America) Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 919 (7th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Elton J. Crim v. Board of Education of Cairo School District No. 1, Charles Althoff, Individually, Kenneth R. Jones, Individually
See Russell, 51 F.3d at 69 ("The fact that some of these reasons were successfully called into question by [the plaintiff's] deposition or affidavit does not defeht summary judgment if at least one reason for each of the actions stands unquestioned.”); see also Wolf v. Buss (America) Inc., 77 F.3d 914, 920 (7th Cir.1996) (establishing that, *542 when an employer gives many reasons for termination, the employee "must raise an issue of fact regarding each of the reasons proffered for his dismissal or suffer the affirmance of the district court’s grant of summary judgment”), cert. denied, �…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
B.L. Key, Inc. v. Utah State Tax Commission
See, e.g., Brown’s Furniture, Inc. v. Wagner, 171 I11.2d 410, 216 Ill.Dec. 537, 544-45 , 665 N.E.2d 795 , 802-03 , cert. denied, — U.S. —, 117 S.Ct. 175 , 136 L.Ed.2d 116 (1996); Otvis Co. v. Tax Appeals Tribunal, 86 N.Y.2d 165 , 630 N.Y.S.2d 680, 686-88 , 654 N.E.2d 954, 960-61 (noting that Quill's physical presence requirement may be met “by the presence in the taxing State of the vendor’s property or the conduct of economic activities in the taxing State performed by the vendor's personnel or on its behalf”), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 116 S.Ct. 518 , 133 L.Ed.2d 426 (1995). 2 …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lillian Worthing WYSHAK
v.
AMERICAN SAVINGS BANK, F.A.
v.
AMERICAN SAVINGS BANK, F.A.
No. 96-96.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 1996.
Published
Citer courts: Third Circuit (1) · S.D. New York (1)
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.