green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.8 score
“cause of action 'accrues' when plaintiff knew or should have known that actionable harm has been done to him.”
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Tandon v. United Air Lines
But see Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Co. Ltd., 96 F.3d 151, 153-54 (6th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. ---, 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997) (on rehearing, court reversed a denial of damages for pain and suffering under DOSHA and held that “[t]he Zicherman opinion therefore neither added to, nor made any changes in, the law regarding the availability of nonpecuniary damages under DOHSA.”).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Lumsden v. Design Tech Builders, Inc.
cause of action 'accrues' when plaintiff knew or should have known that actionable harm has been done to him.
discussed
Cited "see"
Scott v. Garcia
See Soignier v. American Bd. of Plastic Surgery, 92 F.3d 547, 551 (7th Cir.1996) (finding that, as an action for “fundamental injury to the individual rights of a person,” a claim under the ADA is best characterized for statute of limitations purposes as a claim for personal injury), ce rt. denied, 519 U.S. 1093 , 117 S.Ct. 771 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997); Baker v. Board of Regents of the State of Kansas, 991 F.2d 628, 631 (10th Cir.1993) (charac *1065 terizing a claim under the Rehabilitation Act as a claim for personal injury for statute of limitations purposes); Alberti v. City and County …
cited
Cited "see"
Lloyd Marks v. Newcourt Credit Group, Inc.
P. 28(a); see Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Co., 96 F.3d 151, 153 (6th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1093 , 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Charles A. Muer
See Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd., 96 F.3d 151, 154 (6th Cir.1996) ("Bickel II "), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997).
cited
Cited "see"
Estate of Muer v. Karbel
See Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd., 96 F.3d 161, 154 (6th Cir.1996) (“Bickel II”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
Oldham v. Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd.
See Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd., 96 F.3d 151, 153-54 (6th Cir.1996) (declining, in a related case, to address pre-death pain and suffering claims because issue was not raised in initial briefs), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997). 2.
discussed
Cited "see"
Oldham, Nan M. v. Korean Airln Co Ltd
See Bickel v. Korean Air Lines C., Ltd., 96 F.3d 151, 153-54 (6th Cir.1996) (declining, in a related case, to address pre-death pain and suffering claims because issue was not raised in initial briefs), cert. denied, - U.S. , 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997). 2.
discussed
Cited "see"
Allred v. Solaray, Inc.
See Soignier v. American Bd. of Plastic Surgery, 92 F.3d 547, 550 (7th Cir.1996), cert denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 771 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997) (since claim under Title III of the ADA was “best characterized as one for personal injury,” affirming district court’s application of Illinois’ two-year limitation on actions for personal injuries); Doukas v. Metropolitan Life Ins., Co., 882 F.Supp. 1197, 1200 (D.N.H.1995) (“a claim for discrimination brought under the ADA is best characterized as a claim for personal injury”); Doe v. County of Milwaukee, 871 F.Supp. 1072, 1078 (E.D.Wis.…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ruiz
(2×)
See United States v. McCarthy, 77 F.3d 522 , ___ _____________ ________ 535 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 479 (1996), and _____ ______ ___ cert. denied, 65 U.S.L.W. 3505 (U.S. Jan. 21, 1997) (No. 96- _____ ______ 5017).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Beckwith v. Giles
See § 544.275, RSMo 1994; § 561.031, RSMo 1999 Cum.Supp.; Rule 57.07(a)(2); see also Call v. Heard, 925 S.W.2d 840, 846 (Mo. banc 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1093 , 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thaddeus-X and Earnest Bell, Jr. v. Blatter
(2×)
P. 28(a)(3) and (b) (stating that the appellee's brief must include an argument containing the contentions of the parties and the reasons for them); see also Bickel v. Korean Air Lines Co., 96 F.3d 151, 153 (6th Cir.1996) (defendant waived issue by failing to raise it in its opening briefs to the court of appeals), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1093 , 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997) 1 In the original panel decision, the court reasoned that dismissal was proper because Thaddeus-X and Bell had failed to show actual prejudice.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Everett v. Cobb County School District
See, e.g., Soignier v. American Bd. of Plastic Surgery, 92 F.3d 547, 551 (7th Cir.1996)(dis-triet court correctly applied Illinois’ two-year statute of limitations for personal injuries as the most analogous limitations period for an ADA claim), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 117 S.Ct. 771 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997); Baker v. Board of Regents of State of Kan., 991 F.2d 628, 632 (10th Cir.1993) (analogizing Rehabilitation Act claims to personal injury claims); Morse v. University of Vermont, 973 F.2d 122, 127 (2d Cir.1992)(“we now hold that actions under § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act are governe…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Frederick Road Ltd. Partnership v. Brown & Sturm
(2×)
The Court of Appeals tempered the harshness of this “date of wrong” rule by adopting the discovery rule, “by which the action is deemed to accrue on the date when the plaintiff knew or, with due diligence, reasonably should have known of the wrong.” Id.; see also Doe v. Maskell, 342 Md. 684, 690 , 679 A.2d 1087 (1996), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997); Edmonds v. Cytology Servs. of Md.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dalrymple v. Brown
(2×)
Super.1995) (disallowing testimony concerning recovered memory of sexual assault in a criminal trial because the phenomenon of repressed memory is subject to “violent” disagreement); see also Doe v. Maskell, 342 Md. 684 , 679 A.2d 1087 (1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 770 , 136 L.Ed.2d 716 (1997)(noting serious disagreement in the psychological community concerning repression theory).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rocky Mountain Conference of the United Methodist Church
v.
Winkler
v.
Winkler
No. 96-888.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 21, 1997.
Published
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Maryland (1)
Ct. App. Colo. Certiorari denied.