green
Positive treatment
6.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1981 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1981
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 30 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Engineered Products Co. v. Donaldson Co., Inc.
See Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 793 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981) (“ ‘the full burden of exploration of the facts and assumptions underlying the testimony of an expert witness [is] squarely on the shoulders of opposing counsel’s cross-examination’ ” (citation omitted)); see also Bryan v. FMC Corp., John Bean Div., 566 F.2d 541 , 545 (5th Cir.1978) (“rule 705 shifts to the cross-examiner the burden of eliciting the bases of an expert witness’ opinion”); United States v. Santarpio, 560 F.2d 448, 454-55 (1st Cir.197…
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Search of Premises of Wilson
See Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981); see also Silberstein, 16 F.3d at 859-60 (stating a “district court has considerable leeway in application of its local rules”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Haggerty v. Himelein
A prohibition proceeding may be maintained to restrain a body or officer acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity as opposed to a legislative, executive, or administrative capacity (Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 353, n 3 ; Matter of Dondi v Jones, supra, at 13 ; see generally, Matter of McGinley v Hynes, 51 NY2d 116, 123-124 , rearg denied 51 NY2d 1009 , cert denied 450 US 918 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
Claude H. v. County of Oneida
Baez did not hold that the District Attorney is not a county officer but, rather, held that the District Attorney represents the State when prosecuting a criminal action (Baez v Hennessy, supra, at 77; see, Matter of McGinley v Hynes, 51 NY2d 116, 123 , rearg denied 51 NY2d 1009 , cert denied 450 US 918 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rios v. Bigler
See Smith v. Ford Motor Company, 626 F.2d 784, 789 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981) (district court abused its discretion by allowing a medical doctor who had been designated to testify about plaintiff’s treatment to testify as to proximate cause).
cited
Cited "see"
Pacific Employers Insurance v. P.B. Hoidale Co.
See Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 797 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Church v. Petrologic Petroleum, Ltd.
See Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Opticon, Inc., and Opto Electronics
See Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 793 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981) (“ ‘the full burden of exploration of the facts and assumptions underlying the testimony of an expert witness [is] squarely on the shoulders of opposing counsel’s cross-examination’ ” (citation omitted)); see also Bryan v. FMC Corp., John Bean Div., 566 F.2d 541 , 545 (5th Cir.1978) (“rule 705 shifts to the cross-examiner the burden of eliciting the bases of an expert witness’ opinion”); United States v. Santarpio, 560 F.2d 448, 454-55 (1st Cir.197…
discussed
Cited "see"
Deep Aggarwal v. Ponce School of Medicine
See Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 796 (10th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981); United States v. Simmons, 476 F.2d 33, 35 (9th Cir. 1973); Lance, Inc. v. Dewco Services, 422 F.2d 778, 783-84 (9th Cir.1970).
discussed
Cited "see"
Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. Donahue
(2×)
See Smith v. Ford Motor Company, 626 F.2d 784 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Meadows
See Garrett v. United States, 625 F.2d 712, 713 (5th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981); United States ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see"
Colf v. Serra
It is an extraordinary remedy which is available “ ‘only where there is a clear legal right and only when the body or officer “acts or threatens to act without jurisdiction in a matter over which it has no power * * * or where. it exceeds its authorized powers in a proceeding over which it has jurisdiction” ’ (Matter of Dondi v Jones, 40 NY2d 8, 13 , quoting Matter of State of New York v King, 36 NY2d 59, 62 ; Matter of Nigrone v Murtagh, 36 NY2d 421, 423-424 ; see Matter of Vega v Bell, 47 NY2d 543, 546-547 ).” (Matter of McGinley v Hynes, 51 NY2d 116, 122-123 , cert den 450 US 91…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Davis
(People v Gelman, 93 NY2d 314 , 317 ]1999]; see also People v Rodriguez, 281 AD2d 375, 376 [1st Dept 2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 906 [2001].) The Court of Appeals has noted that the prosecutor’s “presentation need not be complete for consideration equivalent to a dismissal to occur.” (Wilkins, 68 NY2d at 274 .) Where the withdrawal takes place “near the end of the presentation of the evidence,” the grand jury may be deemed to have “heard and considered enough” to render the withdrawal the equivalent of a dismissal. ( 68 NY2d at 274-275 ; see also Matter of McGinley v Hynes, 75 AD2d …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Van Wie v. Kirk
Prohibition may be maintained to prevent or control judicial or quasi-judicial action as opposed to legislative, executive, or administrative action (see, Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 353, n 3 ; Matter of Dondi v Jones, 40 NY2d 8, 13 , rearg denied 39 NY2d 1058 ; see also, Matter of McGinley v Hynes, 51 NY2d 116, 123-124 , rearg denied 51 NY2d 1009 , cert denied 450 US 918 ).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rapco, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Cf. Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(e); see also Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 795 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981); 6A Wright, Miller & Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1527 at 287 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Wesley
(People v Wilkins, supra; see also, Matter of McGinley v Hynes, 75 AD2d 897 , revd on other grounds 51 NY2d 116 , cert denied 450 US 918 .) Since the withdrawal in Wilkins (supra) occurred before any action by the Grand Jury, the Grand Jury did not vote to dismiss or file a notice of dismissal with the court.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Robinson v. Missouri Pacific Railroad
See also Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 793 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Lewis R. Robinson v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
See also Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 793 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bay Area Typographical Union, Union No. 21 Sharmaine Dyson and Dale Spencer v. Alameda Newspapers, Inc., D/B/A the Daily Review
See also Hospital and Institutional Workers Local 250 v. Pasatiempo Development Corp., 627 F.2d 1011 (9th Cir.1980), ce rt. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1362 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981), (hereafter Pasatiempo).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gaines v. Sun Refinery and Marketing
(2×)
See also Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 793-794 (10th Cir.1980), cert. den. 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (the combined effect of Rules 703 and 705, Federal Rules of Evidence, [or 12 O.S.1981 §§ 2703 and 2705, supra note 8] is to place the burden of exploring the facts and assumptions underlying the expert’s opinion squarely on the shoulders of opposing counsel in cross-examination); Bryan v. John Bean Division of FMC Corp., 566 F.2d 541, 545 (5th Cir.1978) ('“the onus of eliciting the bases of the opinion is placed on the cross-examined' (Emphasis added.)). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
International Adhesive Coating Company, Inc. v. Bolton Emerson International, Inc., Emerson Electric Co., D/B/A Chromalox, and Leo C. Pelkus, Inc.
Proyecectos, S.A., 728 F.2d 572, 576-77 (1st Cir.1984); United States v. Santarpio, 560 F.2d 448, 455 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 984 , 98 S.Ct. 609 , 54 L.Ed.2d 478 (1977); see also Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 793 (10th Cir.1980) (the effect of Rules 703 and 705 is to “place the full burden of exploration of the facts and assumptions underlying the testimony of an expert witness squarely on the shoulders of opposing counsel’s cross-examination”), *545 cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Henry v. New York State Commission of Investigation
(See, Matter of Lee v County Ct., 27 NY2d 432, 436-437 ; see also, Matter of McGinley v Hynes, 51 NY2d 116 , cert denied 450 US 918 .) The same is true with regard to that portion of petition ers’ request for relief in the nature of certiorari.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Local Joint Executive Board Of Las Vegas v. Riverboat Casino, Inc.
See, e.g., Hospital & Institutional Workers, Local 250 v. Pasatiempo Development Corp., 627 F.2d 1011, 1012 (9th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1362 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Local Joint Executive Board v. Riverboat Casino, Inc.
See, e.g., Hospital & Institutional Workers, Local 250 v. Pasatiempo Development Corp., 627 F.2d 1011, 1012 (9th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1362 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Gosewisch v. American Honda Motor Co.
See e.g., Smith v. Ford Motor Company, 626 F.2d 784 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Moe v. Avions Marcel Dassault-Breguet Aviation
See also, Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Moe v. Avions Marcel Dassault-Breguet Aviation
See also, Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784 (10th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
James I. Valn v. United States of America Department of Defense, United States Army
Compare Garrett v. United States, 625 F.2d 712 (5th Cir.1980) (claims arose out of military relationship), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981) and Torres v. United States, 621 F.2d 30 (1st Cir.1980) (same) with Bankston v. United States, 480 F.2d 495 (5th Cir.1973) (remand for determination of military status) 6 The district court recognized that Feres was not directly applicable to the instant case because no de jure military relationship existed between Valn and the Army at the time the alleged tortious acts occurred. 548 F.Supp. at 924 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Valn v. United States
Compare Garrett v. United States, 625 F.2d 712 (5th Cir. 1980) (claims arose out of military relationship), ce rt. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981) and Torres v. United States, 621 F.2d 30 (1st Cir. 1980) (same) with Bankston v. United States, 480 F.2d 495 (5th Cir.1973) (remand for determination of military status). .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Jeanne M. And Roger E. Gay v. P. K. Lindsay Company, Inc.
See, e.g., Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 626 F.2d 784, 794 (10th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 918 , 101 S.Ct. 1363 , 67 L.Ed.2d 344 (1981).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Board of Supervisors of San Diego County
v.
Lonergan, Auditor and Controller of San Diego County
v.
Lonergan, Auditor and Controller of San Diego County
No. 80-962.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 23, 1981.
Cited by 6 opinions | Published
Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.