green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
7.5 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, 1992–2013 · 2 courts ·
…in an english-speaking country, requirements of 'reasonable notice' are satisfied when the notice is given in english
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Alicea v. Board of Review
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
in an english-speaking country, requirements of 'reasonable notice' are satisfied when the notice is given in english
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Rivera v. Board of Review
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
in an english-speaking country, requirements of 'reasonable notice' are satisfied when the notice is given in english
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Vialez v. New York City Housing Authority
the courts have recognized, whether explicitly or implicitly, that in an english-speaking country, requirements of 'reasonable notice' are satisfied when the notice is given in english.
cited
Cited "see"
FIRST SAVINGS AND LOAN INSURANCE v. Alexander
See Jordon v. County of Los Angeles, 669 F.2d 1311 (9th Cir. 1982), vacated on other grounds, 459 U.S. 810, 103 S.Ct. 35 , 74 L.Ed.2d 45 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Villa-Villa
See also Alfonso v. Board of Review, 89 N.J. 41 , 444 A.2d 1076 (1982), appeal dismissed and cert. denied, 459 U.S. 806 , 103 S.Ct. 30 , 74 L.Ed.2d 45 (1982)(requirements of reasonable notice satisfied when notice is sent in English).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Maria-Kelley F. Yniguez Jaime P. Gutierrez, and Arizonans Against Constitutional Tampering, Intervenors-Plaintiffs-Appellees, and State of Arizona Rose Mofford Robert Corbin v. Arizonans for Official English Robert D. Parks, Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants. Maria-Kelley F. Yniguez v. State of Arizona Rose Mofford Robert Corbin, and Arizonans for Official English Robert D. Parks, Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants. Maria-Kelley F. Yniguez v. State of Arizona Rose Mofford Robert Corbin
While Arizonans for Official English complains of the "Babel" of many languages, the Court in Cohen responds that this "verbal cacophony is ... not a sign of weakness but of strength." Id. at 25 , 91 S.Ct. at 1788 ; see also Alfonso v. Board of Review, 89 N.J. 41 , 444 A.2d 1075, 1085 (Wilentz, C.J. dissenting) (arguing that notice should be given in the language of the claimant and stating that to do so would show that "we are strong enough to give meaning to our fundamental rights when they are possessed by non-English speaking people in our midst"), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 806 , 103 S.Ct. 30…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Maria-Kelley F. Yniguez Jaime P. Gutierrez, and Arizonans Against Constitutional Tampering, Intervenors-Plaintiffs-Appellees, and State of Arizona Rose Mofford Robert Corbin v. Arizonans for Official English Robert D. Parks, Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants. Maria-Kelley F. Yniguez v. State of Arizona Rose Mofford Robert Corbin, and Arizonans for Official English Robert D. Parks, Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants. Maria-Kelley F. Yniguez v. State of Arizona Rose Mofford Robert Corbin
While Arizonans for Official English complains of the "Babel" of many languages, the Court in Cohen responds that this "verbal cacophony is ... not a sign of weakness but of strength." Id. at 25 , 91 S.Ct. at 1788 ; see also Alfonso v. Board of Review, 89 N.J. 41 , 444 A.2d 1075, 1085 (Wilentz, C.J. dissenting) (arguing that notice should be given in the language of the claimant and stating that to do so would show that "we are strong enough to give meaning to our fundamental rights when they are possessed by non-English speaking people in our midst"), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 806 , 103 S.Ct. 30…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Yniguez v. Arizonans for Official English
While Arizonans for Official English complains of the “Babel” of many languages, the Court in Cohen responds that this “verbal cacophony is ... not a sign of weakness but of strength.” Id. at 25 , 91 S.Ct. at 1788 ; see also Alfonso v. Board of Review, 89 N.J. 41 , 444 A.2d 1075, 1085 (Wilentz, C.J. dissenting) (arguing that notice should be given in the language of the claimant and stating that to do so would show that “we are strong enough to give meaning to our fundamental rights when they are possessed by non-English speaking people in our midst”), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 806 , …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Alfonso
v.
Board of Review, Department of Labor and Industry of New Jersey
v.
Board of Review, Department of Labor and Industry of New Jersey
No. 82-5112.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 4, 1982.
Cited by 5 opinions | Published
Appeal[*807] from Sup. Ct. N. J. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.