green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.9 score
“due process requires that courts provide notice and opportunity to be heard before imposing any kind of sanctions.”
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, Inc.
But see Jim Arnold Corp. v. Hydrotech Sys., Inc., 109 F.3d 1567 , 1571-72, 42 U.S.P.Q.2d 1119 , 1122-24 (Fed.Cir.1997), cer t. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 338 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997) (denying section 1338(a) jurisdiction for a claim raising-ownership and inventorship disputes).
discussed
Cited "but see"
Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. Harmonic Design, Inc.
But see Jim Arnold Corp. v. Hydrotech Sys., Inc., 109 F.3d 1567 , 1571-72, 42 U.S.P.Q.2d 1119 , 1122-24 (Fed.Cir.1997), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 338 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997) (denying section 1338(a) jurisdiction for a claim raising ownership and inventorship disputes). 48 Were we to conclude that validity and enforceability, unlike infringement, were not substantial enough, then there would be no section 1338(a) jurisdiction over count four, because Hunter Douglas could prevail under theories that do not depend on a substantial question of federal patent law.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re Highgate Equities, Ltd., Debtor. Shmuel Klein, Movant-Appellant v. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker and David L. Tillem
due process requires that courts provide notice and opportunity to be heard before imposing any kind of sanctions.
cited
Cited "see"
Collier v. Washington
See Alvarado, 2003 WL 22097092 , at *5 (citing Ted Lapidus, S.A. v. Vann, 112 F.3d 91, 97 (2d Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 932 , 118 S.Ct. 337 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997); Satcorp Intern.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re: Jerasimos Papapanayotou, Esq., Jerasimos Papapanayotou, Esq. v. Jeffrey Sapir, Esq., as Chapter 7 Trustee
See Ted Lapidus, S.A. v. Vann, 112 F.3d 91, 96 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 932 , 118 S.Ct. 337 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997). 1.
discussed
Cited "see"
Mackler Productions, Inc. v. Cohen
See Satcorp., 101 F.3d at 6 . “[A] sanctioned attorney must receive specific notice of the conduct alleged to be sanctionable and the standard by which that conduct will be assessed.” Ted Lapidus, S.A. v. Vann, 112 F.3d 91, 97 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 337 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
MacKler Productions, Inc. v. Cohen
See Satcorp., 101 F.3d at 6 . "[A] sanctioned attorney must receive specific notice of the conduct alleged to be sanctionable and the standard by which that conduct will be assessed." Ted Lapidus, S.A. v. Vann, 112 F.3d 91, 97 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 337 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Kouri Perez
See, e.g., Lapidus v. Vann, 112 F.3d 91 , 96 (2d Cir.) (“Were we writing on a clean slate, we would be tempted to confine Cheng to its unusual facts and characterize the sanctions order here as nonappealable under the Cohen doctrine.”), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 337 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997); Cleveland Hair, 104 F.3d at 125 (noting that its prior interlocutory-appeal rulings had “not played to universal acclaim,” and that any extension of those precedents would result in “a substantial, and unjustified, erosion of the final-decision requirement”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re MPM Enterprises, Inc.
It is beyond cavil that the appellant was entitled to notice of the threatened imposition of the sanction and an opportunity to be heard. “[A] sanctioned attorney must *505 receive specific notice of the conduct alleged to be sanctionable and the standard by which that conduct will be assessed.” Satcorp International Group v. China National Silk Import & Export Corp., 101 F.3d at 6 ; see also Ted Lapidus, S.A. v. Vann, 112 F.3d 91, 97 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 118 S.Ct. 337 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997); accord Ametex Fabrics, Inc. v. Just In Materials, Inc., 140 F.3d 101, 109 (2d …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Starcher v. Correctional Medical Systems
See, e.g., Ted Lapidus, S.A. v. Vann, 112 F.3d 91, 95-96 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 337 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997); Serritella v. Markum, 119 F.3d 506, 512 (7th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Starcher v. Correctional Medical Systems, Inc.
See, e.g., Ted Lapidus, S.A. v. Vann, 112 F.3d 91, 95-96 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 118 S.Ct. 337 , 139 L.Ed.2d 262 (1997); Serritella v. Markum, 119 F.3d 506, 512 (7th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Guido et ux., dba East Side Floor and Wall
v.
City of Fairmont
v.
City of Fairmont
No. 97-324.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 20, 1997.
Published
Citer courts: Second Circuit (1)
Cir. Ct. Marion County, West Virginia. Certiorari denied.