green
Positive treatment
6.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Oparaji (In Re Oparaji)
See In re Coastal Plains, Inc., 179 F.3d 197, 205 (5th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1117 , 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cricket Communications, Inc. v. Trillium Industries, Inc.
See In re Coastal Plains Inc., 179 F.3d 197, 205 (5th Cir.1999), ce rt. denied, 528 U.S. 1117 , 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000); see also Horsley-Layman v. Adventist Health Sys./Sunbelt, Inc., 221 S.W.3d 802 , 807 n. 3 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2007, pet. denied) (applying federal bankruptcy law to judicial estoppel to “promote the goal of uniformity and predictability in bankruptcy proceedings” and to “give the proper effect to the judgment of the bankruptcy court”); Dallas Sales Co. v. Carlisle Silver Co., 134 S.W.3d 928, 931 (Tex.App.-Waco 2004, pet. denied); Cleaver v. Cleaver, 1…
examined
Cited "see"
Rumore v. Wamstad (In Re Waddell)
(4×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company v. Chemque, Inc., 303 F.3d 1294 (Fed.Cir.2002). 4 In the case of Browning Manufacturing v. Mims (In re Coastal Plains, Inc.), 179 F.3d 197 (5th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1117 , 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stated the following regarding the doctrine of judicial estoppel: Judicial estoppel is “a common law doctrine by which a party who has assumed one position in his pleadings may be estopped from assuming an inconsistent position”.
discussed
Cited "see"
Wei Zhang v. American Gem Seafoods, Inc., Delaware Corporation McMi Food Company, a Texas Corporation Harry Lees, a Natural Person
See Lambert v. Ackerley, 180 F.3d 997, 1008 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1116 , 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000), (noting that in Fair Labor Standards Act case, jury was instructed that one element was "[t]hat the protected activity was a substantial motivating factor in the adverse employment action”); Sloman v. Tadlock, 21 F.3d 1462, 1471 (9th Cir.1994) (approving, in First *1030 Amendment context, instruction that jury "must find that the plaintiffs protected [activity] ... was a motivating factor in the defendants’ decisions”); Los Angeles Police Protective …
discussed
Cited "see"
Troy Swinton v. Potomac Corporation, Dba Crescent Cardboard Company, Dba crescent/u.s. Mat
See Lambert v. Ackerley, 180 F.3d 997, 1009-1010 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc), cert, denied, 528 U.S. 1116 , 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000) (citing Larez v. Holcomb, 16 F.3d 1513, 1518 (9th Cir.1994); Benigni v. City of Hemet, 879 F.2d 473, 480 (9th Cir.1989)).
discussed
Cited "see"
At Massey Coal Co., Inc. v. Massanari
See Holland v. Big River Minerals Corp., 181 F.3d 597, 606 (4th Cir.1999), cert. denied 528 U.S. 1117 , 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000). “[F]ive Justices rejected the conclusion that an unconstitutional taking was effected, reasoning that the constitutionality of the financial burden on the company imposed by the Coal Act must be considered as a question of substantive due process rather than as a takings question because no identifiable property interest was infringed by the legislation.” Id.See also Unity Real Estate Co. v. Hudson, 178 F.3d 649, 659 (3d Cir.1999) (“we are bound …
cited
Cited "see"
Estate of McMorris v. Commissioner
See F.D.I.C. v. Noel, 177 F.3d 911, 915 (10th Cir.1999), ce rt. denied, 528 U.S. 1116 , 120 S.Ct. 935 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000).
cited
Cited "see"
Joseph D. Griggs v. E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Company, Joseph D. Griggs v. E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Company
See Farr v. U.S. West Communications, Inc., 151 F.3d 908, 913 (9th Cir. 1998) {Fair II), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1116 , 120 S.Ct. 935 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sigmon Coal Co. v. Apfel
See Holland v. Big River Minerals Corp., 181 F.3d 597, 600-01 (4th Cir.1999), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000); Holland v. Keenan Trucking Co., 102 F.3d 736, 738-39 (4th Cir.1996); Carbon Fuel Co. v. USX Corp., 100 F.3d 1124 , 1127-29 (4th Cir.1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Philip Williamson Itzik Riefronda Kirlin Thomas Painter,plaintiffs-Appellants v. General Dynamics Corporation,opinion
See Lambert v. Ackerley, 180 F.3d 997, 1004 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth Edison Co. v. United States
See Holland v. Big River Minerals Corp., 181 F.3d 597, 606 (4th Cir.1999), cert. denied, U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000)(noting that five justices reasoned that the takings analysis was inapplicable to the Coal Act “because no identifiable property interest was infringed by the legislation”); Unity Real Estate Co. v. Hudson, 178 F.3d 649, 658-59 (3d Cir.1999), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 396 , 145 L.Ed.2d 309 (1999); Anker Energy Corp. v. Consolidated Coal Co., 177 F.3d 161, 169 (3d Cir.1999), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 496 , 145 L.Ed.2d 383 (1999); Associat…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re Country Lake Enterprises, Inc.
See, e.g., Holland v. Big River Minerals Corp., 181 F.3d 597, 605-06 (4th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1117 , 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed.2d 814 (2000) (discussing general rule that appellate court will not consider issue raised for the first time on appeal, and noting that whether district court may consider issue in subsequent proceedings is generally within discretion of court).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ramer v. NJ Transit Bus Operations, Inc.
Co., 690 F. 2d 595, 599 (6th Cir.1982); see also In re Coastal Plains, Inc., 179 F. 3d 197, 206-07 (5th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1117 , 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed. 2d 814 (2000); Astor Chauffeured Limousine Co. v. Runnfeldt Inv.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kimball Intern. v. Northfield Metal
Co., 690 F. 2d 595, 599 (6th Cir.1982); see also In re Coastal Plains, Inc., 179 F. 3d 197, 206-07 (5th Cir.1999), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 120 S.Ct. 936 , 145 L.Ed. 2d 814 (2000); Astor Chauffeured Limousine Co. v. Runnfeldt Inv.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
New York Department Stores de Puerto Rico, Inc.
v.
Almacenes Rodriguez, Inc.
v.
Almacenes Rodriguez, Inc.
No. 99-656.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 18, 2000.
Published
Sup. Ct.' P. R. Certiorari denied.