green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 5×
15.8 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1986 ·
…statements between eoconspirators which provide reassurance, serve to maintain trust and cohesiveness among them, or inform each other of the current status of the conspiracy further the ends of the conspiracy and are admissible
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Greene v. Philip Morris USA Inc.
section 6b establishes a simple, mechanical rule
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Grandoit v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination Grandoit v. Boston Housing Authority
properly promulgated regulation has the force of law . . . and must be accorded all the deference due to a statute
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Donald Bogusz, A/K/A Bogey, United States of America v. John O'rourke, A/K/A Hap
(2×)
organic chemistry text
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Judd Carver Eisenberg
(2×)
statements between eoconspirators which provide reassurance, serve to maintain trust and cohesiveness among them, or inform each other of the current status of the conspiracy further the ends of the conspiracy and are admissible
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Misco, Inc., Mid-South Aluminum Company, and Everett W. Fielder, Jr. v. United States Steel Corporation and Alside, Incorporated
Ct. 844, 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Jeppesen & Co., 642 F.2d 339, 341 (9th Cir. 1981); Galella v. Onassis, 487 F.2d 986, 996 (2d Cir.1973).
discussed
Cited "see"
Freeborn v. Mak
(2×)
See Daniel Int’l v. Fischbach & Moore Inc., 916 F.2d 1061, 1064 (5th Cir.1990) (citing Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1267 (11th Cir.) cert denied 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983)).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re AMC Realty Corp.
(2×)
See PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 897 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) (“we have noted that because of the potentially broad scope of [Rule 60(b)(6) ], relief should only be granted where the moving party has demonstrated ‘extraordinary circumstances’ or ‘extreme hardship’ emphasis added).
discussed
Cited "see"
Midwest Motor Sports, Inc. v. Arctic Cat Sales, Inc.
(2×)
See Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262,1271 (11th Cir.) (while tape recording is not illegal, code of conduct imposes higher standard than mere legality), cert, denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Roe v. Operation Rescue, 1989 WL 66452 at * 3 (E.D.Pa.1989), affd 898 F.2d 142 (3rd Cir.) (Table), cert. *1159 denied, 498 U.S. 958 , 111 S.Ct. 385 , 112 L.Ed.2d 396 (1990); Miaño, 148 F.R.D. at 76; ABA Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, Formal Op. 337 (1974) (ruling that “no lawyer should record any conversation whether by tapes or other electronic device…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Bailey
(2×)
See United States v. Taylor, 802 F.2d 1108 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1094 , 107 S.Ct. 1309 , 94 L.Ed.2d 164 (1987). * * * * * * A defendant's arrest does not necessarily terminate his involvement in a conspiracy, United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 253 (3rd Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) and cooperation with authorities may or may not be sufficient to show withdrawal.
discussed
Cited "see"
CSU Holdings, Inc. v. Xerox Corp.
(2×)
See Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262 , 1273 n. 26 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Cal Dive Int’l, Inc. v. M/V Tzimin, 127 F.R.D. 213, 215 (S.D.Ala. 1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Newspaper & Mail Deliverers' Union
(Yellow Bus Lines v Drivers, Chauffeurs & Helpers Local Union 639, 883 F2d, supra, at 136; see, Bonanno Linen Serv. v McCarthy, 708 F2d 1, 11-12 [1st Cir], cert denied 464 US 936 [1983]; Airco Speer Carbon-Graphite v Local 502, 494 F Supp 872, 877 [WD Pa 1980] ["the acts of an agent can be ratified by inaction which manifests consent”].) The deficiency in the charge in this case substantially undermined the integrity of the Grand Jury proceeding and created the strong possibility that the NMDU was indicted merely because many of its officers, members, or agents had been involved in the commi…
discussed
Cited "see"
Hoffman v. Wisner Classic Manufacturing Co.
(2×)
See, PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 896 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); La Societe Anonyme des Parfums Le Galion v. Jean Patou, Inc., 495 F.2d 1265, 1275 (2d Cir.1974) (“a dismissal for failure to prosecute an action ‘operates as an adjudication on the merits, unless the court specified otherwise ... under normal circumstances we would have no alternative to holding that such a dismissal would have res judicata effect.”); Proctor v. Millar Elevator Service Co., 8 F.3d 824 (D.C.Cir.1993) (it was error to fail to dismiss second …
discussed
Cited "see"
Vannoy v. Cooper
(2×)
See Parott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1267 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Daniel Int’l Corp. v. Fischbach & Moore, Inc., 916 F.2d 1061, 1064-65 (5th Cir.1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wright
(2×)
Reviewing the defendant’s Jencks Act claim, the Circuit stated: “[T]he rough interview notes of [Government] agents should be kept and produced so that the trial court can determine whether the notes should be made available to the [defendant] under Brady ... or the Jencks Act.” 580 F.2d at 71 (quoting United States v. Vella, 562 F.2d 275, 276 (3d Cir.1977) (defendant claimed district court erred in refusing to exclude, under Jencks Act, testimony of two FBI agents who had destroyed rough notes of interview with defendant)); see United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 259 (3d Cir.) (establ…
discussed
Cited "see"
Akin v. Pafec Limited
(2×)
See Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1267 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Akin v. PAFEC Ltd.
(2×)
See Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1267 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Miano v. AC & R Advertising, Inc.
(2×)
See Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1271 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Roe v. Operation Rescue, No. 88-5157, 1989 WL 66452 , at *3 (E.D.Pa.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Kenneth Charles Fragoso
(2×)
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); United States v. Lutz, 621 F.2d 940, 947 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 859 , 101 S.Ct. 160 , 66 L.Ed.2d 75 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
U.S. v. Fragoso
(2×)
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S. Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); United States v. Lutz, 621 F.2d 940, 947 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 859 , 101 S. Ct. 160 , 66 L.Ed.2d 75 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wiesner v. Willkie Farr & Gallagher
(2×)
See PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 896 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wilson v. State
(2×)
See United States v. Traitz, 871 F.2d 368, 399 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 78 , 107 L.Ed.2d 44 (1989) (quoting and citing United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 252 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Crigler v. Axia Inc.
(2×)
See Wold v. Bull Valley Management Co., 96 Ill.2d 110 , 70 Ill.Dec. 238 , 449 N.E.2d 112 , cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 345 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Flores v. Dugan, 91 Ill.2d 108 , 61 Ill.Dec. 783 , 435 N.E.2d 480 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Gambino
(2×)
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 , 245-47 & n. 3 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); United States v. Continental Group, Inc., 603 F.2d 444, 457 (3d Cir.1979), ce rt. denied, 444 U.S. 1032 , 100 S.Ct. 703 , 62 L.Ed.2d 668 (1980). 7 Rather, the court was persuaded that Glasser’s bootstrapping rationale continued to require a “clear preponderance of evidence independent of the hearsay statement to satisfy the judge that the declarant was a participant [in the conspiracy].” Trowery, supra, 542 F.2d at 627 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Chapman & Cole and Ccp, Ltd., Plaintiffs-Counter Appellees-Cross v. Itel Container International B v. And Itel Containers International Corp. (Itel), Defendants-Counter Third Party Appellants-Cross Urquhart and Hassell, Attorneys for Itel Container International B v. V. Norman Ehrentraut, Third Party
(2×)
See Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1270-72 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Chapman & Cole v. Itel Container International B.V.
(2×)
See Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1270-72 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Samples v. City Of Atlanta
(2×)
Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); see Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1272-73 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Samples v. City of Atlanta
(2×)
Fed.RXiv.P. 41(b); see Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1272-73 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Diaz
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 260 (3rd Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 963 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. One Lear Jet Aircraft, Serial No. 35a-280, Registration No. Yn-Bvo, Leybda Corp., Claimant-Appellant
(2×)
See Parrott v. Wilson, 1QR F.2d 1262, 1267 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
examined
Cited "see"
Samuel Nemaizer, General Manager of the New York Coat, Suit, Dress, Rainwear and Allied Workers' Union I.L.G.W.U. v. Jack Baker, an Individual
(4×)
See PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 896 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983). 10 Appellees' complaint simply substitutes claims of ERISA violations for the previous claims of a violation of state labor law; it relies on the same operative facts.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. De Peri, Joseph. Appeal of Joseph De Peri. United States of America v. Martin, James. Appeal of James Martin. United States of America v. Linso, Dennis. Appeal of Dennis Linso. United States of America v. Morrell, George. Appeal of George Morrell. United States of America v. Pecic, Henry. Appeal of Henry Pecic. United States of America v. Murphy, Theodore. Appeal of Theodore Murphy. United States of America v. Katz, George. Appeal of George Katz
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 255 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 963 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) 5 We have repeatedly recognized that when the court denies a motion for acquittal on the conspiracy charge, the court's decision to send the case to the jury implies it has made a Trowery finding.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. De Peri
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 255 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 963 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983). .
examined
Cited "see"
Government of the Virgin Islands v. Franke Hoheb
(4×)
Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E); see generally United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 245-57 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse v. Belk Bros. Co.
(2×)
See PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 898 (2d Cir.), cert. denied 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Carl Angelo Deluna, United States of America v. Carl James Civella, United States of America v. Charles David Moretina, United States of America v. Carl Wesley Thomas, United States of America v. Anthony Chiavola, Sr., United States of America v. Carl James Civella
Accord United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 254-57 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); United States v. Perez, 658 F.2d 654 , 660-61 & n. 5 (9th Cir.1981); United States v. Wright, 588 F.2d 31, 37-38 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 1236 , 59 L.Ed.2d 467 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. DeLuna
Accord United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 254-57 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); United States v. Perez, 658 F.2d 654 , 660-61 & n. 5 (9th Cir.1981); United States v. Wright, 588 F.2d 31, 37-38 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 1236 , 59 L.Ed.2d 467 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Koecher
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238 (3d Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Stillman v. United States, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Burgess v. Cohen
See PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894 , 896 n. 1 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 344 , *1124 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983). 1 However, the opinion in Costello v. United States, 365 U.S. 265 , 81 S.Ct. 534 , 5 L.Ed.2d 551 (1961), not mentioned in the Second Circuit opinion, leads me to believ^ that the scope of Rule 41(b) was not intended to include a dismissal on limitations grounds as an unqualified decision upon the merits.
discussed
Cited "see"
Steve Fredieu v. Rowan Companies, Inc.
Co., 425 F.2d 393, 396 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 833 , 91 S.Ct. 64 , 27 L.Ed.2d 64 (1970); see Rhodes v. Amarillo Hospital Dist., 654 F.2d 1148, 1154 (5th Cir.1981); accord Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F.2d 1262, 1267 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James Massa, United States of America v. Duane Skinner
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 255-256 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); Davenport, The Confrontation Clause and the Co-Conspirator Exception in Criminal Prosecutions: A Functional Analysis, 85 Harv.L.Rev. 1378, 1385-1391 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Gibbs, Stephen A/K/A \Jake
(2×)
See United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 255 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
CPI Security Systems, Inc. v. Vivint Smart Home, Inc.
See, e.g., United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 254 (3d Cir. 1983) (“[I]t is clear from the Advisory Committee Notes that the drafters intended that the personal knowledge foundation requirement of [F.R.E.] 602 should . . . not [apply] to admissions . . . admissible under [F.R.E.] 801(d)(2).”), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 (1983); see also Mahlandt v. Wild Canid Survival & Research Ctr., Inc., 588 F.2d 626 , 630–31 (8th Cir. 1978) (holding that personal knowledge requirement does not apply to F.R.E. 801(d)(2)); see also Donlin v. Aramark Corp., 162 F.R.D. 149, 150 (D.
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Clonts
(3×)
See, e.g., Parrott v. Wilson, 707 F. 2d 1262 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 (1983) (duration of illness was found to be long enough that trial could not be postponed).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Frances Parker, Etc. v. John W. Poole, M.D.
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 254 (3d Cir.) ("[I]t is clear from the Advisory Committee Notes that the drafters intended that the personal knowledge foundation requirement of [F.R.E.] 602 should . . . not [apply] to admissions . . . admissible under [F.R.E.] 801(d)(2)."), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S. Ct. 344 , 78 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jackson v. Refined Sugars, Inc.
(2×)
See, e.g., PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 897 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) (noting that a one year delay was unreasonable under Rule 60(b)(6)); Fustok v. Conticommodity Serv.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Spavento v. United States
(2×)
See Poloron Products, Inc. v. Lybrand Ross Bros. & Montgomery, 534 F.2d 1012 (2d Cir.1976); see also PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing, Co., 700 F.2d 894, 896 (2d Cir.1983), (“[r]ule 41(b) dictates that all but certain enumerated dismissals will be considered ‘on the merits,’ ”) cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thompson v. Toyota Motor Corp.
(2×)
The court denied the motion as untimely, holding that a litigant “may not avoid the time limitation imposed by Rule 59(e) by filing his motion pursuant to Rule 60(b).” Id. at 604-05 ; see also PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 898 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) (holding similarly).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re AL and LP Realty Co.
(2×)
See Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b); see also *234 PRC Harris Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 897 (2d Cir.) (“[i]n considering whether Rule 60(b)(6) motion is timely [court] must scrutinize the particular circumstances of the case, and balance the interest in finality with the reasons for delay”), cert. denied 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Socialist Republic of Romania v. Wildenstein & Co.
(2×)
See, e.g., PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co., 700 F.2d 894, 897 (2d Cir.), cert. denied 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983) (one year delay unreasonable under Rule 60(b)(6)); Fustok v. Conticommodity Serv.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
PRC Harris, Inc.
v.
Boeing Co.
v.
Boeing Co.
No. 83-251.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 31, 1983.
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.