green
Positive treatment
5.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1999
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alfred Lenoci, Sr.
See United States v. Williams, 154 F.3d 655, 657 (6th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1113 , 119 S.Ct. 889 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 (1999); United States v. Taylor, 984 F.2d 298, 303 (9th Cir.1993); United States v. Seligsohn, 981 F.2d 1418, 1425 (3d Cir.1992), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1119 , 115 S.Ct. 920 , 130 L.Ed.2d 800 (1995); United States v. Harper, 972 F.2d 321, 322 (11th Cir.1992); United States v. Johnson, 971 F.2d 562, 576 (10th Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Osterberg v. Peca
(2×)
See Suster v. Marshall, 149 F.3d 523, 529 (6th Cir.1998) ("Review of the constitutionality of spending limits in Buckley was not based upon the line of reasoning that such limitations should apply only to federal political campaigns."), cert. denied, ____ U.S. ___, 119 S.Ct. 890 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 (1999); Kruse v. City of Cincinnati, 142 F.3d 907, 913 (6th Cir.) (finding no support for the contention that states have more latitude than the federal government in regulating the First Amendment expression of its citizens), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ____, 119 S.Ct. 511 , 142 L.Ed.2d 424 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
Daggett v. Commission on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices
(2×)
See Suster v. Marshall, 149 F.3d 523, 526 (6th Cir.1998), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 119 S.Ct. 890 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Nash
Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263, 280 , 119 S.Ct. 1936, 1948 , 144 L.Ed.2d 286, 301 (1999) (citing United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 676 , 105 S.Ct. 3375, 3380 , 87 L.Ed.2d 481, 490 (1985)); see also State v. Nelson, 155 N.J. 487, 497-98 , 715 A.2d 281 (1998), cert, denied, 525 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 890 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Leland Smart, Jr.
It “applies where ‘(1) the challenged action [is] in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to cessation or expiration, and (2) there [is] a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party [will] be subject to the same action again.’ ” Rosales-Garcia, 322 F.3d at 396 (alterations in original) (quoting Spencer, 523 U.S. at 17 , 118 S.Ct. 978 ); see also Suster v. Marshall, 149 F.3d 523, 527 (6th Cir.1998) (same), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 890 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thorndike Ex Rel. Thorndike v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
E.g., id.; United States v. Torres-Rosa, 209 F.3d 4, 7 (concluding that it is not the court’s obligation “to do counsel’s homework”); see also Kauthar SDN BHD v. Sternberg, 149 F.3d 659, 668 (7th Cir.1998) (“It is not the obligation of this court to research and construct the legal arguments open to parties, especially when they are represented by counsel”) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 890 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 (1999); Higgins v. New Balance Athletic Shoe, Inc., 194 F.3d 252, 260 (1st Cir.1999) (“The district court is free to disregard arguments that ar…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mario Rosales-Garcia v. J.T. Holland, Warden, Reynero Arteaga Carballo v. Mark Luttrell, Warden Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
Second, the Court has long recognized an exception to the mootness doctrine for cases that are “capable of repetition, yet evading review.” This exception applies where “(1) the challenged action [is] in its duration too short to be fully litigated pri- or to cessation or expiration, and (2) there [is] a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party [will] be subject to the same action again.” Spencer, 523 U.S. at 17 , 118 S.Ct. 978 (quotation omitted); see also Suster v. Marshall, 149 F.3d 523, 527 (6th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 890 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Michael A. King v. One Unknown Federal Correctional Officer
See, e.g., Kauthar SDN BHD v. Sternberg, 149 F.3d 659, 669 (7th Cir.1998), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 119 S.Ct. 890 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 (1999); Delgado-Brunet v. Clark, 93 F.3d 339, 342 (7th Cir.1996); Woods v. Indiana Univ.-Purdue, 996 F.2d 880, 884 (7th Cir.1993).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
SBC Communications, Inc.
v.
Federal Communications Commission
v.
Federal Communications Commission
No. 98-652.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 19, 1999.
Consideration, Motion, Took.
Published
C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of Texas Justice Foundation for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Certiorari denied.
Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.