Santiago v. K-Six Television, Inc., 537 U.S. 823 (2002). · Go Syfert
Santiago v. K-Six Television, Inc., 537 U.S. 823 (2002). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the veterans' benefits system remains a non-adversarial system when cases are pending before the veterans' administration. however, the court of appeals for veterans claims' proceedings are not non-adversarial.”
38 citation events (38 in the last 25 years) across 10 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: KSEND v. United States (uscfc, 2005-12-08)
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) KSEND v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2005 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed.
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Ada Bobbitt v. Anthony J. Principi
Vet. App. · 2004 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the veterans' benefits system remains a non-adversarial system when cases are pending before the veterans' administration. however, the court of appeals for veterans claims' proceedings are not non-adversarial.
discussed Cited "see" Jerry R. Shedden, Claimant-Appellant v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary of Veterans Affairs (2×)
Fed. Cir. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Forshey v. Principi, 284 F.3d 1335, 1352 (Fed.Cir.) ( en banc ) (referring to the presumption of service connection set forth in 38 U.S.C. 105(a)), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 823 , 123 S.Ct. 110 , 154 L.Ed.2d 33 (2002).
discussed Cited "see" Walker v. Merit System Protection Board
Fed. Cir. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Forshey v. Principi, 284 F.3d 1385 , 1335-45 (Fed.Cir.2002) (en banc) (Ordinarily, this court does not consider issues that were not raised below.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 823 , 123 S.Ct. 110 , 154 L.Ed.2d 33 (2002).
discussed Cited "see" Roe Ex Rel. Roe v. Keady
10th Cir. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
The Court went on to cite with approval the definition of “invidious” as “tending to excite odium, ill will, or envy, likely to give offense; esp., unjustly and irritatingly discriminating.” Bray, 506 U.S. at 274 , 113 *1193 S.Ct. 753 (quotation omitted); see Richland Bookmart, Inc. v. Nichols, 278 F.3d 570, 577 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 109 , 154 L.Ed.2d 33 (2002).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Bowers v. Bell
Ala. Civ. App. · 2010 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Forshey v. Principi, 284 F.3d 1335 , 1357 n. 20 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 823 , 123 S.Ct. 110 , 154 L.Ed.2d 33 (2002), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in Morgan v. Principi, 327 F.3d 1357, 1358-59 (Fed.Cir.2003) (‘ “Appellate review does not consist of supine submission to erroneous legal concepts even though none of the parties declaimed the applicable law below.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Corrigan v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2008 · signal: see also · confidence low
McZeal v. Sprint Nextel Corp., 501 F.3d 1354, 1356 (Fed.Cir.2007); see also Forshey v. Principi, 284 F.3d 1335, 1357 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 823 , 123 S.Ct. 110 , 154 L.Ed.2d 33 (2002).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Woodruff v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2008 · signal: see also · confidence low
McZeal v. Sprint Nextel Corp., 501 F.3d 1354, 1356 (Fed.Cir.2007); see also Forshey v. Principi, 284 F.3d 1335, 1357 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 823 , 123 S.Ct. 110 , 154 L.Ed.2d 33 (2002).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Gary Littlejohn v. United States
9th Cir. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Manio v. Derwinski, 1 VetApp. 140, 144 (1991); see also Forshey v. Principi, 284 F.3d 1335, 1355 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied , — U.S.-, 123 S.Ct. 110 , 154 L.Ed.2d 33 (2002).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Santiago
v.
K-Six Television, Inc.
01-1818.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 2002.
537 U.S. 823

537 U.S. 823

SANTIAGO
v.
K-SIX TELEVISION, INC., ET AL.

No. 01-1818.

Supreme Court of United States.

October 7, 2002.

1

CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS.

2

Sup. Ct. Tex. Certiorari denied.