green
Positive treatment
4.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 2015 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2015
2020
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Chaille Dubois v. Atlas Acquisitions LLC
See Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 758 F.3d 1254, 1259-60 (11th Cir. 2014) (collecting cases), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 135 S.Ct. 1844 , 191 L.Ed.2d 724 (2015).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alejandro Garcia-Lagunas
See United States v. Briley, 770 F.3d 267, 277 (4th Cir.2014) (finding evi-dentiary error harmless where “[a]n array of witnesses gave clear, compelling, and consistent accounts about [the defendant’s] actions”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1844 , 191 L.Ed.2d 724 (2015); cf. Johnson, 617 F.3d at 295 (finding erroneous admission of a DEA agent’s testimony as a lay -witness was not harmless where the only direct evidence linking the defendant to the charged crime was the testimony of one codefendant that was contradicted by another codefendant’s testimony).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Avalos v. LVNV Funding, LLC (In re Avalos)
Compare Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 758 F.3d 1254, 1262 (11th Cir.2014) (holding that filing a time-barred claim in a bankruptcy case violates the FDCPA), petition for cert. denied, — U.S. —, 135 S.Ct. 1844 , 191 L.Ed.2d 724 (2015)), with Simmons v. Roundup Funding, LLC, 622 F.3d 93, 96 (2d Cir.2010) (holding that “filing a proof of claim in bankruptcy court cannot form the basis for an FDCPA claim”); In re Chaussee, 399 B.R. 225, 235-41 (9th Cir. BAP 2008) (same).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Reed v. LVNV Funding, LLC
Compare Crawford v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 758 F.3d 1254, 1262 (11th Cir.2014) (holding that filing a time-barred claim in a bankruptcy case violates the FDCPA), petition for cert. filed, 83 U.S.L.W. 3796 (U.S. Jan. 21, 2015) (No. 14-858), with Simmons v. Roundup Funding, LLC, 622 F.3d 93, 96 (2d Cir.2010) (holding that “filing a proof of claim in bankruptcy court cannot form the basis for an FDCPA claim”); In re Chaussee, 399 B.R. 225, 235-41 (9th Cir. BAP 2008) (same).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY
v.
RETRACTABLE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
v.
RETRACTABLE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
No. 14–850..
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 20, 2015.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.