green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
10.0 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1989 ·
…it is well settled that unclean hands is no bar to antitrust recovery
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 31 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Vining v. Martyn
he heretofore unbroken rule has been that any settlement payments are deducted from the damages awarded after trebling
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Bubis v. Blanton
it is well settled that unclean hands is no bar to antitrust recovery
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Bubis v. Blanton
it is well settled that unclean hands is no bar to antitrust recovery
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Fritschle v. Andes
Ct. 1893, 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) (holding that “the institution of the plaintiffs suit tolls or suspends the running of the statute of limitations governing a compulsory counterclaim.”) (citation omitted).
discussed
Cited "see"
Insultherm, Inc. v. Tank Insulation International, Inc.
See Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Milliken & Co., 690 F.2d 380 , 389 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) (in holding that antitrust counterclaims were compulsory counterclaims to original action asserting breach of a licensing agreement, the court distinguished Mercoid on its facts and stated that Mercoid’s “continuing validity is open to serious question”); United States v. Eastport Steamship Corp., 255 F.2d 795, 805 (2nd Cir.1958) (“in view of the criticism which the decision has received and the failure of the Court to discuss the princip…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. One Parcel of Real Estate
See, United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 [, 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 ] (1983); United States v. One 1974 Cadillac Eldorado Sedan, 548 F.2d 421, 423 (2d Cir.1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re 1986 Chevrolet Corvette
See United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983), and United States v. One 1974 Cadillac Eldorado Sedan, 548 F.2d 421 (2d Cir.1977).
cited
Cited "see"
No. 88-6194
See United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725, 727 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Real Property & Residence at 3097 S.W. 111th Avenue
See United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725, 727 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983).
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. One Parcel of Real Estate Commonly Known as 916 Douglas Avenue, Elgin, Illinois, Appeal of Paul F. Born, Iii, Claimant-Appellant
(4×)
See United States v. Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) 5 Several circuits have declined to require a "substantial connection" test for forfeiture under Sec. 881(a)(4), the provision from which the language in Sec. 881(a)(7) is drawn.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Lot 4, Block 5 of the Eaton Acres
See United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), ce rt. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983); United States v. One 1974 Cadillac Eldorado Sedan, 548 F.2d 421, 423 (2d Cir.1977). 657 F.Supp. at 1064 .
discussed
Cited "see"
No. 87-5298
See United States v. One 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, etc., 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) 2 If Mrs. Allen knew that the jointly owned property was being used by her husband for illegal drug purposes, we take it that her interest would be subject to forfeiture whether or not she had specific knowledge of the particular acts described in this opinion
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Lots 12, 13, 14, & 15, Keeton Heights Subdivision
See United States v. One 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, etc., 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983). .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Property L. on Trafalgar St. in Aiken, Sc
See United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983); United States v. One 1974 Cadillac Eldorado Sedan, 548 F.2d 421, 423 (2d Cir.1977). 6 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. 26.075 Acres, More or Less Located in Swift Creek Township
See United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), ce rt. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983); United States v. One 1974 Cadillac Eldorado Sedan, 548 F.2d 421, 423 (2d Cir.1977). * * * * * * In United States v. 1966 Beechcraft Aircraft Model King Air, 777 F.2d 947 (4th Cir.1985), a case not cited by any party, the Fourth Circuit considered whether a vehicle used to transport a drug conspirator to the scene of the crime was subject to forfeiture.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Certain Lots in Virginia Beach
See United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983); United States v. One 1974 Cadillac Eldorado Sedan, 548 F.2d 421, 423 (2d Cir.1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Smith v. Department of Social & Health Services
See A.B.M. v. M.H. & A.H., 651 P.2d 1170 (Alaska 1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 77 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Haralson v. Federal Home Loan Bank Board
Accord Fidelity Savings & Loan Ass’n v. FHLBB, 540 F.Supp. 1374 (N.D.Cal.) rev’d on other grounds, 689 F.2d 803 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983); Telegraph Savings & Loan Ass’n v. FSLIC, 564 F.Supp. 862 (N.D.Ill.1981) aff’d sub. nom.
discussed
Cited "see"
Pelz v. Streator National Bank
See also Haarmann v. Davis (Mo. 1983), 651 S.W.2d 134 (declaring the rule in Missouri as follows: “While an assignee’s assumption of contractual obligations may be implied from clear and convincing evidence that the parties agreed to a contract of assumption, mere acceptance of benefits under a contract of sale is not sufficient”); accord, Cedar Point Apartments, Ltd. v. Cedar Point Investment Corp. (8th Cir. 1982), 693 F.2d 748 (construing Missouri law), cert. denied, Cedar Point Investment Corp. v. Cedar Point Apartments, Ltd. (1983), 461 U.S. 914 , 77 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
UST Capital Corp. v. Charter National Life Insurance
See Burlington Industries v. Milliken & Co., 690 F.2d 380 , 389 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) (citing 6 C.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Andrew J. CRAWFORD, Appellant
“In determining whether a failure to render ... performance is material, the following circumstances are significant: ... the extent to which the injured party will be deprived of the benefit which he reasonably expected; ... the likelihood that the party failing to perform ... will cure his failure, taking account of all the circumstances; [and] ... the extent to which the behavior of the party failing to perform ... comports with standards of good faith and fair dealing.” Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 241 at 237 (1981); see also Cedar Point Apartments, Ltd. v. Cedar Point Investme…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Alfred J. Ferris v. Dean Haymore Lucille Inman, Western Surety Company, & Third Party and Carl Edward Simmons, D/B/A Simmons Auto Sales, Individually Clarence B. Inman, \Bill
In Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 401 U.S. 321 , 91 S.Ct. 795 , 28 L.Ed.2d 77 (1971), a case brought under the Sherman and Clayton Acts, the Court stated that "[i]t is settled that, entirely apart from any release, a plaintiff who has recovered any item of damage from one coconspirator may not again recover the same item from another conspirator; the law, that is, does not permit a plaintiff to recover double payment." Zenith Radio, 401 U.S. at 348 , 91 S.Ct. at 811 ; see also Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Milliken & Co., 690 F.2d 380, 391 (4th Cir.1982) (diminution of antitr…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ferris v. Haymore
In Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 401 U.S. 321 , 91 S.Ct. 795 , 28 L.Ed.2d 77 (1971), a case brought under the Sherman and Clayton Acts, the Court stated that ’’[i]t is settled that, entirely apart from any release, a plaintiff who has recovered any item of damage from one coconspirator may not again recover the same item from another conspirator; the law, that is, does not permit a plaintiff to recover double payment.” Zenith Radio, 401 U.S. at 348 , 91 S.Ct. at 811 ; see also Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Milliken & Co., 690 F.2d 380, 391 (4th Cir.1982) (diminution of…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Matter of Adoption of Baade
(2×)
See In re Adoption of a Child of Indian Heritage, 111 N.J. 155 , 543 A.2d 925 (1988); see also A.B.M. v. M.H., 651 P.2d 1170, 1172 (Alaska 1982) ("The protections of the Act apply to child custody proceedings involving Indian children."), cert denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983); Note, supra, 38 Cath.U.L.Rev. at 540 ("Congress clearly intends that the only prerequisite to the operation of the ICWA be the involvement of an Indian Child in a child custody proceeding.").
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. All Right, Title & Interest in Real Property & a Building Known as 16 Clinton Street
See also United States v. 1964 Beechcraft Baron Aircraft, 691 F.2d 725, 728 (5th Cir.1982) (per curiam), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Daniel C. Morley William T. Evans v. Irving Cohen Halajen Mineral Development Corporation, and Mountainview Associates Newport Coal Associates Etc., Daniel C. Morley William T. Evans v. Irving Cohen Halajen Mineral Development Corporation
Mortgage Equity, 636 F.Supp. at 1151-52 ; Cianfrani, 600 F.Supp. at 1368 ; see also Burlington Indus. v. Milliken & Co., 690 F.2d 380 , 391 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) (settlement deductions made after trebling in antitrust cases).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Morley v. Cohen
Mortgage Equity, 636 F.Supp. at 1151-52 ; Cianfrani, 600 F.Supp. at 1368 ; see also Burlington Indus, v. Milliken & Co., 690 F.2d 380 , 391 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) (settlement deductions made after trebling in antitrust cases).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission v. National Football League, an Unincorporated Association, Baltimore Football Club, Inc. (Baltimore Colts), Buffalo Bills, Inc., Chargers Football Co. (San Diego Chargers), Chicago Bears Football Club, Inc., Cincinnati Bengals, Inc., Cleveland Browns, Inc., Dallas Cowboys Football Club, Inc., Detroit Lions, Inc., Five Smiths, Inc. (Atlanta Falcons), Green Bay Packers, Inc., Houston Oilers, Inc., Kansas City Chiefs Football Club, Inc., Los Angeles Rams Football Co., Miami Dolphins, Ltd., Minnesota Vikings Football Club, Inc., New England Patriots Football Club, Inc., New Orleans Saints Louisiana Partnership, New York Football Giants, New York Jets Football Club, Inc., Philadelphia Eagles Football Club, Inc., Pittsburgh Steelers Sports, Inc., Pro-Football, Inc. (Washington Redskins), Efk Sports, Ltd., Sued Herein as Rocky Mountain Empire Sports, Inc. (Denver Broncos), St. Louis Football Cardinals Co., San Francisco Forty-Niners, Seattle Professional Football (Seattle Seahawks), and Tampa Bay Area Nfl Football, Inc. (Tampa Bay Buccaneers), Oakland Raiders, Ltd., Cross Claimant-Appellee v. National Football League, an Unincorporated Association, Cross
(2×)
See also Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Milliken & Co., 690 F.2d 380, 385-86 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) (offsetting against plaintiff's gross damages "the amount which plaintiffs would have paid ... in the absence of the royalty-maintenance conspiracy"). 61 This offset mechanism may also be utilized to reduce a damage award where a portion of that award includes damages which go beyond the scope of adjudicated antitrust liability.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission v. National Football League
(2×)
See also Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Milliken & Co., 690 F.2d 380, 385-86 (4th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) (offsetting against plaintiff’s gross damages “the amount which plaintiffs would have paid ... in the absence of the royalty-maintenance conspiracy”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
San Marino Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Federal Home Loan Bank Board
In other words, the Court must determine “whether there were facts before the [Bank] Board, when it acted, on which the [Bank] Board could reasonably have concluded that ‘a’ statutory ground existed for appointment of a [conservator].” Biscayne Federal Savings and Loan v. Federal Home Loan Bank Board, 720 F.2d 1499, 1505 (11th Cir.1983); see also, Fidelity Savings and Loan Association v. Federal Home Loan Bank Board, 689 F.2d 803, 814 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 914 , 103 S.Ct. 1983 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Salinas Valley Community Federal Credit Union v. National Credit Union Administration
See also Fidelity Savings and Loan Ass’n v. Federal Home Loan Bank Bd., 689 F.2d 803 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied,-U.S.-, 103 S.Ct. 1893 , 77 L.Ed.2d 283 (1983) (10-day statutory stay does not apply to closure of state chartered savings and loan association by federal receiver; due process satisfied by state law providing for possibility of post-seizure judicial review).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hunter
v.
Maxie
v.
Maxie
No. 82-1338.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 2, 1983.
Cited by 4 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Sixth Circuit (2) · District Court of Appeal of Fl… (1)
Sup. Ct. Alaska. Certiorari denied.