green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
5.5 score
“a panel of this court can only overrule a prior panel decision if such overruling is unequivocally directed by controlling supreme court precedent”
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Lee
a panel of this court can only overrule a prior panel decision if such overruling is unequivocally directed by controlling supreme court precedent
cited
Cited "see"
Center for Biological Diversity v. Pizarchik
See Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri v. Norton, 240 F.3d 1250, 1259 (10th Cir.2001), ce rt. denied, 534 U.S. 1078 , 122 S.Ct. 807 , 151 L.Ed.2d 693 (2002); Manygoats, 558 F.2d at 558 .
cited
Cited "see"
Scott v. Pfizer Inc.
See Motion for Summary Judgment, see also Martin v. Medtronic Inc., 254 F.3d 573, 575 (5th Cir.), cert. denied 534 U.S. 1078 , 122 S.Ct. 807 , 151 L.Ed.2d 693 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Citizens against Casino Gambling v. Kempthorne
See Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri v. Norton, 240 F.3d 1250, 1258-59 (10th Cir.2001), cert. denied sub nom, Wyandotte Nation v. Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri, 534 U.S. 1078 , 122 S.Ct. 807 , 151 L.Ed.2d 693 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wyandotte Nation v. City of Kansas City, Kansas
Accord Sac & Fox Nation of Mo. v. Norton, 240 F.3d 1250, 1259 (10th Cir.2001), ce rt. denied, - U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 807 , 151 L.Ed.2d 693 (2002) (finding that the Wyandotte Tribe was neither necessary nor indispensable pursuant to Rule 19 when the Secretary of Interior’s interest in the suit was, “[a]s a practical matter ... ‘virtually identical’ to the interests of the tribe”); Kansas v. United States, 249 F.3d 1213 , 1226 (10th Cir.2001) (holding that the tribe was neither necessary nor indispensable under Rule 19 when the state sought relief firom a decision by the National Indian G…
discussed
Cited "see"
Wilkins v. United States
Although the United States is generally liable for tort damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2674 , it "is not liable ... for injuries to servicemen where the injuries arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to service." Feres, 340 U.S. at 146 , 71 S.Ct. 153 ; see generally Costo v. United States, 248 F.3d 863, 868-69 (9th Cir.2001) (discussing cases in which soldiers were injured, and in which courts held that the Feres doctrine bars suit), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 122 S.Ct. 808 , 151 L.Ed.2d 693 (2001). 12 Wilkins's position on his tort claims is slightly…
discussed
Cited "see"
Wilkins v. United States
Although the United States is generally liable for tort damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2674 , it “is not liable ... for injuries to servicemen where the injuries arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to service.” Feres, 340 U.S. at 146 , 71 S.Ct. 153 ; see generally Costo v. United States, 248 F.3d 863, 868-69 (9th Cir.2001) (discussing cases in which soldiers were injured, and in which courts held that the Feres doctrine bars suit), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 808 , 151 L.Ed.2d 693 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Klamath Tribe Claims Committee v. United States
See also Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri v. Norton, 240 F.3d 1250, 1260 (10th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1078 , 122 S.Ct. 807 , 151 L.Ed.2d 693 (2002); Bassett v. Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, 204 F.3d 343, 358 (2d Cir.2000); Pasco Int'l (London) Ltd. v. Stenograph Corp., 637 F.2d 496 , 501 n. 9 (7th Cir.1980) (indicating that "the absence of an alternative forum would weigh heavily, if not conclusively against dismissal”). .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Wyandotte Nation, fka Wyandotte Tribe of Oklahoma
v.
Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri
v.
Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri
No. 01-445.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 7, 2002.
Cited by 3 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Fifth Circuit (1)
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.