green
Positive treatment
8.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Painting Industry of Hawaii Market Recovery Fund v. United States Department of the Air Force
Id. at 530.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Painting Industry of Hawaii Market Recovery Fund v. United States Department of the Air Force, Seattle Building and Construction Trades Council, Afl-Cio Rebound v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Seattle Building and Construction Trades Council, Afl-Cio Rebound v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
Certainly nothing prevents [plaintiff] from publicly advertising its investigation and requesting any VA loan recipient who desires to cooperate with [plaintiff] to come forward if he so elects, or pursuing other less controversial avenues to obtain the information. 23 Id. at 530. 24 Finally, we note that the requesters already have a substantial amount of the information they seek.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No. 5 v. United States Dept. of Housing & Urban Development
In reaching its conclusion, the court held in part that the interest in protecting the rights of black veterans to receive their benefits was not a “public interest” for purposes of Exemption 6, since “assertions of public interest in merely ‘monitoring’ the operation of a federal program, without more, have not been viewed favorably by the courts.” Id. at 530.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
International Brotherhood Of Electrical Workers Local Union No. 5 v. United States Dept. Of Housing And Urban Development
In reaching its conclusion, the court held in part that the interest in protecting the rights of black veterans to receive their benefits was not a "public interest" for purposes of Exemption 6, since "assertions of public interest in merely 'monitoring' the operation of a federal program, without more, have not been viewed favorably by the courts." Id. at 530.
cited
Cited "see"
Cox Cable of Cedar Rapids, Inc. v. Board of Review
See Urbanek v. United States, 731 F.2d 870 , 874 n. 7 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 508 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Federal Labor Relations Authority, in 90-3690 v. U.S. Department of the Navy, Navy Ships Parts Control Center, and U.S. Department of the Navy, Navy Fleet Material Support Office, and U.S. Department of the Navy, Navsea Logistics Center, and U.S. Department of the Navy, Navy Publishing and Printing Service, American Federation of Government Employees, Intervenor. U.S. Department of the Navy, Navy Ships Parts Control Center, and U.S. Department of the Navy, Navy Fleet Material Support Office, and U.S. Department of the Navy, Navsea Logistics Center, and U.S. Department of the Navy, Navy Publishing and Printing Service, in 90-3724 v. Federal Labor Relations Authority
Service, 502 F.2d 133 (3d Cir.1974), a case relied on by Department of the Navy, we observed that "there are few things which pertain to an individual in which his privacy has traditionally been more respected than his own home." Id. at 137 ; accord Heights Community Congress v. Veteran's Admin., 732 F.2d 526, 529 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 506 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Federal Labor Relations Authority v. U.S. Department of the Navy
Service, 502 F.2d 133 (3d Cir.1974), a case relied on by Department of the Navy, we observed that “there are few things which pertain to an individual in which his privacy has traditionally been more respected than his own home.” Id. at 137 ; accord Heights Community Congress v. Veteran’s Admin., 732 F.2d 526, 529 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 506 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Securities and Exchange Commission v. First City Financial Corporation, Ltd.
(2×)
See SEC v. Youmans, 729 F.2d 413, 415 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 507 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984); SEC v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc., 565 F.2d at 18 . 17 43 Appellants raise two troubling points about the injunction order.
cited
Cited "see"
Akron Center for Reproductive Health v. Slaby
See SEC v. Youmans, 729 F.2d 413 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 507 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Akron Center for Reproductive Health, an Ohio Corporation Max Pierre Gaujean, M.D., Individually and on Behalf of His Patients Patty Poe, a Minor, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Similarly Situated Persons v. Lynn Slaby, Etc. v. State of Ohio, Intervenor-Appellant
See SEC v. Youmans, 729 F.2d 413 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 507 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984) 2 The term "days" excludes Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, as the respective "period[s] of time prescribed or allowed [are] less than seven days." Ohio R.App.P. 14(A) 3 Because we affirm the district court's judgment as to each challenged element of the Ohio statute, we agree that the impact of our decision and the absence of a severability clause preclude severance of those portions of the statute declared unconstitutional 4 This observation was made in the context of the Su…
cited
Cited "see"
Association Of American Railroads v. Interstate Commerce Commission
See Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc. v. FERC, 734 F.2d 1486 , 1523-25 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 507 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Association of American Railroads v. Interstate Commerce Commission
See Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc. v. FERC, 734 F.2d 1486 , 1523-25 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 507 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
United Ass'n of Journeymen & Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipefitting Industry, Local 598 v. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
See Heights Community Congress v. Veterans Admin., 732 F.2d 526, 529 (6th Cir.) (“an important privacy interest in ... addresses”), ce rt. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 506 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984); American Fed’n of Gov’t Employees, Local 1923 v. United States Dep’t of Health and Human Servs., 712 F.2d 931, 932 (4th Cir.1983) (“employees have a strong privacy interest in their home addresses”); Wine Hobby USA, Inc. v. IRS, 502 F.2d 133, 136-37 (3d Cir.1974) (“there are few things which pertain to an individual in which his privacy has traditionally been more respected than …
discussed
Cited "see"
United Association Of Journeymen And Apprentices Of The Plumbing And Pipefitting Industry, Local 598 v. Department Of The Army, Corps Of Engineers, Walla Walla District
See Heights Community Congress v. Veterans Admin., 732 F.2d 526, 529 (6th Cir.) ("an important privacy interest in ... addresses"), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 506 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984); American Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Local 1923 v. United States Dep't of Health and Human Servs., 712 F.2d 931, 932 (4th Cir.1983) ("employees have a strong privacy interest in their home addresses"); Wine Hobby USA, Inc. v. IRS, 502 F.2d 133, 136-37 (3d Cir.1974) ("there are few things which pertain to an individual in which his privacy has traditionally been more respected than his own home"); D…
discussed
Cited "see"
Jersey Central Power & Light Company v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Allegheny Electric Cooperative, Inc., Intervenors
(2×)
Washington Gas Light Co. v. Baker, 188 F.2d 11, 15, 19 (D.C.Cir.1950) (agency gave inadequate consideration to impact of rate increase on consumers), cert. denied, 340 U.S. 952 , 71 S.Ct. 572 , 95 L.Ed. 686 (1951); see Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc. v. FERC, 734 F.2d 1486 , 1527 (D.C.Cir.) (“[T]he combination of FERC’s rate base and rate of return methodologies [in this case] does not produce an acceptable ‘end result’ ”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 507 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Stratton Oakmont, Inc.
Corp., 890 F.2d at 1228 ; see also SEC v. Youmans, 729 F.2d 413, 415 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 507 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Paul D. Norris, First Citizens National Bank of Dyersburg, Tennessee
See, e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission v. Youmans, 729 F.2d 413, 415 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1034 , 105 S.Ct. 507 , 83 L.Ed.2d 398 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 41 v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
See Mead Data Central, Inc. v. United States Department of the Air Force, 566 F.2d 242 , 251 n. 13 (D.C.Cir.1977) (concerning exemption 5 — district court’s balancing should not be upset unless it is “either based on an error of law or a factual predicate which is clearly erroneous”); Church of Scientology v. United States Department of the Army, 611 F.2d 738, 742 (9th Cir.1979); see also Heights Community Congress v. Veterans Admin *436 istration, 732 F.2d 526, 530 (6th Cir.) (court of appeals “constrained to conclude that the ultimate conclusion of the trial court was not clearly e…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Urbanek
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 84-201.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 26, 1984.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.