green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
3.5 score
“the supreme court has clearly recognized a first amendment interest in those who wish to communicate with prison inmates, although it has expressly reserved the question of how that interest operates in the case of 'mass mailings.”
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Nelson v. Miller
But see Futernick v. Sumpter Township, 78 F.3d 1051, 1055 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. ——, 117 S.Ct. 296 , 136 L.Ed.2d 215 (1996), which articulated this Court's understanding of how we are to view this language in Pennhurst : It is error to read the language about the 'party in interest’ as an extension of Eleventh Amendment immunity to actions seeking injunctive relief against a state officer who is violating federal law_ To the extent the text of Penn-hurst supports such a reading, it is overruled by Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 , 109 S.Ct. 2304 , 105 L.Ed.2…
discussed
Cited "but see"
Nelson v. Miller
But see Futernick v. Sumpter Township, 78 F.3d 1051, 1055 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 928 , 117 S.Ct. 296 , 136 L.Ed.2d 215 (1996), which articulated this Court's understanding of how we are to view this language in Pennhurst: It is error to read the language about the 'party in interest' as an extension of Eleventh Amendment immunity to actions seeking injunctive relief against a state officer who is violating federal law....
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Dixon v. Kirby
the supreme court has clearly recognized a first amendment interest in those who wish to communicate with prison inmates, although it has expressly reserved the question of how that interest operates in the case of 'mass mailings.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Technologies AG
(2×)
Applying Illinois law, the Ro-boset've court explained that “[cjompensa-tory damages for fraud are intended to compensate for any injury which is the direct and natural consequence of the plaintiffs acting on the faith of defendant’s representations.” Id. at 273-74 (internal quotations omitted).
discussed
Cited "see"
Medina v. City of East Chicago, Indiana
See Futernick v. Sumpter Township, 78 F.3d 1051 , 1056 n. 7 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 928 , 117 S.Ct. 296 , 136 L.Ed.2d 215 (1996); (suggesting that personal animosity between the parties should not turn an otherwise valid enforcement action into a constitutional violation actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ).
cited
Cited "see"
Futernick v. Sumpter Township
See Futernick v. Sumpter Township, 78 F.3d 1051 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 928 , 117 S.Ct. 296 , 136 L.Ed.2d 215 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Montcalm Publishing v. Commonwealth of VA
See Montcalm Publ’g Corp. v. Beck, 80 F.3d 105 , 106 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 928 , 117 S.Ct. 296 , 136 L.Ed.2d 215 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Susan Stemler v. City of Florence Bobby Joe Wince Thomas Dusing and John Dolan, William Chipman, Administrator of the Estate of Conni Black v. City of Florence Bobby Joe Wince Thomas Kenner John Dolan Ron Kenner, Boone County Sheriff Rob Reuthe and Chris Alsip
See, e.g., Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 373 , 6 S.Ct. 1064, 1072-73 , 30 L.Ed. 220 (1886). 77 Furthermore, while a plaintiff in a selective-prosecution case must demonstrate that she was prosecuted because she was the member of some group, and not merely because the state actor prosecuted her out of purely personal animosity, see Futernick v. Sumpter Twp., 78 F.3d 1051 , 1057 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 296 , 136 L.Ed.2d 215 (1996), the availability of such a claim has never been limited only to those groups accorded heightened scrutiny under equal protection jurisp…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Northrop Corp.
v.
Northrop Corp.
No. 96-123.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 15, 1996.
Published
Citer courts: S.D. West Virginia (1)
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.