West v. Bell, 176 L. Ed. 2d 180 (2010). · Go Syfert
Search
West v. Bell, 176 L. Ed. 2d 180 (2010). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the concept of a 'concrete' injury is particularly elusive in the establishment clause context.”
52 citation events (52 in the last 25 years) across 9 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights v. City and County of San Francisco (ca9, 2010-10-22)
Treatment trajectory · 2010 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2010 2018 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights v. City and County of San Francisco
9th Cir. · 2010 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
the concept of a 'concrete' injury is particularly elusive in the establishment clause context.
discussed Cited "see" American Atheists, Inc. v. Duncan (2×)
10th Cir. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Green v. Haskell County Bd. of Comm'rs, 568 F.3d 784 , 788 n. 1 (10th Cir.2009), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 1687 , 176 L.Ed.2d 180 (2010). [5] This court delayed issuing this opinion, awaiting the Supreme Court's decision in Salazar v. Buono, ___ U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 1803 , 176 L.Ed.2d 634 (2010).
discussed Cited "see" American Atheists, Inc. v. Davenport (2×)
10th Cir. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Green v. Haskett County Bd. of Comm'rs, 568 F.3d 784 , 788 n. 1 (10th Cir.2009), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1687 , 176 L.Ed.2d 180 (2010). .
discussed Cited "see" American Atheists, Inc. v. Duncan (2×)
10th Cir. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Green *1152 v. Haskell County Bd. of Comm'rs, 568 F.3d 784 , 788 n. 1 (10th Cir.2009), cert. denied,U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1687 , 176 L.Ed.2d 180 (2010). 6 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Nick
10th Cir. · 2010 · signal: see also · confidence low
Morsey v. Chevron USA, Inc., 94 F.Bd 1470, 1477 (10th Cir.1996); see also United States v. Montgomery, 620 F.2d 753, 757 (10th Cir.1980) (“Certainly the trial court has discretion to determine whether to reopen a case, and ordinarily a decision to reopen will not be reversed on review without a clear showing of abuse of discretion.”)- A district court abuses its discretion if its decision is “arbitrary, capricious, whimsical, or manifestly unreasonable.” United States v. Doe, 572 F.3d 1162, 1172 (10th Cir.2009) (quoting United States v. Sells, 541 F.3d 1227, 1237 (10th Cir.2008), cert.…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Stephen Michael West
v.
Ricky Bell, Warden
No. 09-461.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 1, 2010.
176 L. Ed. 2d 180
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 63%
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (1)

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 550 F.3d 542.