green
Positive treatment
4.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Select Creations, Inc. v. Paliafito America, Inc.
Accord Old Security, 740 F.2d at 1392 (relying on Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980)).
cited
Cited "see"
Central States Trucking Company v. J.R. Simplot Company
See Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Timothy Jones, Charles Wayne Norman, Perry Cecil Patronelli, and Richard Keith Hagler
See United States v. Llinas, 603 F.2d 506, 508 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. *1051 1079, 100 S.Ct. 1030 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980); United States v. Juarez, 573 F.2d 267, 278 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 915 , 99 S.Ct. 289 , 58 L.Ed.2d 262 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gooley v. Mobil Oil Corp.
See Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980), where the court held that “[i]f [a party] intentionally relinquished a known right, either expressly or by conduct inconsistent with an intent to enforce that right, he has waived it and may not thereafter seek judicial enforcement.” See also Gutor International AG v. Raymond Packer Co., 493 F.2d 938, 944 (1st Cir.1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
See Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980). 20 Ingersoll's contract with Taiwan, as the district court interpreted it, called for under deck stowage.
cited
Cited "see"
Ingersoll Milling Machine Co. v. M/V Bodena
See Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (7th Cir.1979), cert, denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert J. Strauss
See United States v. Llinas, 603 F.2d 506, 508 (5th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1079 , 100 S.Ct. 1030 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980); cf. United States v. Character, 568 F.2d 442, 445 (5th Cir. 1978) (noting “limited scope of review”).
discussed
Cited "see"
National Business Lists, Inc. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.
See Saversiak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Company, 606 F.2d 208 , 212-14 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980); Continental Coatings Corporation v. Metco, Inc., 464 F.2d 1375, 1379-80 (7th Cir.1972); Seven-Up Company v. O-So Grape Co., 283 F.2d 103 (7th Cir.1960), cert. denied, 365 U.S. 869 , 81 S.Ct. 903 , 5 L.Ed.2d 859 (1961).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Glen Sutherland, Edward Maynard and Grace Walker
See United States v. Llinas, 603 F.2d 506 , 509 n.3, 510 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1079 , 100 S.Ct. 1030 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Kids Creek Partners, L.P.
“Estoppel focuses not on the intent of the party, but on the effects of his conduct upon the other parly, for even if he has not waived a known right, he may be estopped from enforcing it.” Vick, 75 B.R. at 249 ; see also Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Mary Ellen Thomason v. Aetna Life Insurance Company
See, e.g., Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (7th Cir.1979), certiorari denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 ; Mitchell, 579 F.2d at 348 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rafael Valencia and Luis Arturo Penaflor
See, e.g., United States v. Llinas, 603 F.2d 506 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1079 , 100 S.Ct. 1030 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980); Onori, 535 F.2d at 948-49 . 6 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Brown
See, e.g., Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980) (right waived by conduct inconsistent with intent to enforce the right); Palermo v. Warden, Green Haven State Prison, 545 F.2d 286 , 295 n. 12 (2d Cir.1976) (estoppel prevents disavowal of contract in face of detrimental reliance on the contract), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 911 , 97 S.Ct. 2166 , 53 L.Ed.2d 221 (1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Eduardo Cancela
See also, United States v. Llinas, 603 F.2d 506, 508 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1079 , 100 S.Ct. 1030 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Coca-Cola Co. Foods Division v. Olmarc Packaging Co.
(2×)
See also Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (CA 7 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980) (estoppel arises when a party’s conduct misleads another to believe a right will not be enforced and causes him to act to his detriment in reliance upon this belief).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Southwire Co. v. Essex Group, Inc.
See also Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208, 213 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1078 , 100 S.Ct. 1029 , 62 L.Ed.2d 762 (1980), a breach of contract action, in which the court stated that an estoppel “arises only when a party’s conduct misleads another to believe that a right will not be enforced and causes him to act to his detriment in reliance upon his belief" (emphasis supplied). 10 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Llinas
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 79-970.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 19, 1980.
Published
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.