green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.1 score
“the supreme court has not informed us otherwise - either indirectly or by doctrinal development.”
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Rudetsky v. O'DOWD
But cf. Islamic Republic of Iran v. Pahlavi, 62 N.Y.2d 474, 484 , 478 N.Y.S.2d 597, 602 , 467 N.E.2d 245, 250 (1984) (diverging from federal doctrine on whether alternative forum must be available to consider forum non conveniens claims), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 783 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
640 Broadway Renaissance Co. v. Cuomo
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
the supreme court has not informed us otherwise - either indirectly or by doctrinal development.
discussed
Cited "see"
William P. Cheng v. Commissioner Internal Revenue Service
See Wolf v. Banco Nacional de Mexico, S.A., 721 F.2d 660, 662 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985); Chacon v. Babcock, 640 F.2d 221, 222 (9th Cir.1981); Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(d) advisory committee’s note on 1946 amendment (“[A] partial summary ‘judgment’ is not a final judgment, and, therefore, ... is not appealable.”).
cited
Cited "see"
K-B Trucking Company and Keith Collins, Cross-Appellants v. Riss International Corporation and World Leasing, Inc., Cross-Appellees
See Perry v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 734 F.2d 1441, 1446 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gary Plastic Packaging Corp. v. Lynch
See Wolf v. Banco Nacional de Mexico, S.A., 739 F.2d 1458, 1461 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985) (court relied on Marine Bank criteria to find that Certificate of Deposit issued by a Mexican bank was not a security).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gary Plastic Packaging Corporation v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.
See Wolf v. Banco Nacional de Mexico, S.A., 739 F.2d 1458, 1461 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985) (court relied on Marine Bank criteria to find that Certificate of Deposit issued by a Mexican bank was not a security). 33 Of the several types of instruments defined as securities, the financial instruments here most clearly resemble "investment contracts." The Supreme Court first interpreted the definition of "investment contract" in SEC v. C.M.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Sanwa Bank, Ltd. v. Kato
See, e.g., Islamic Republic of Iran v. Pahlavi, 62 N.Y.2d 474 , 478 N.Y.S.2d 597 , 467 N.E.2d 245 (1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 783 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nevayaktewa v. Hopi Tribe
As other jurisdictions have explained. “[i]t is a well-established principle that in most instances an appellant may not present arguments in the Court of Appeals that it did not properly raise below.” Rothman v. Hospital Service of Southern California, 510 F.2d 956, 960 (9th Cir.1975); see also Wolf v. Banco Nacional de Mexico, S.A., 739 F.2d 1458, 1460 (9th Cir.1984), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985); United States v. Carlson, 900 F.2d 1346, 1349 (9th Cir.1990).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
EEOC v. State of NY
See also League of Women Voters v. Nassau County Board of Supervisors, 737 F.2d 155 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 783 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. New York
See also League of Women Voters v. Nassau County Board of Supervisors, 737 F.2d 155 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 783 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Finch v. City of Vernon
Evid. 103(a); Fed.R.Civ.P. 61); see also Perry v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., 734 F.2d 1441, 1446 (11th Cir.1984) (party asserting error on appeal has burden of showing prejudice to substantial rights), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Leonard Finch, Cross-Appellant v. City of Vernon, Etc., Cross-Appellee, Clark Rogers, J.C. Armstrong, Jr., Coleman Armstrong, Cross-Appellees. John A. Reddick, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rubert D. Reddick, Deceased, Cross-Appellant v. City of Vernon, Etc., Cross-Appellees, Harrell Sapp, Etc., J.C. Armstrong, Jr., Coleman Armstrong, Cross-Appellees. Leonard Finch, Cross-Appellant v. The City of Vernon, Cross-Appellee, Clark Rogers, J.C. Armstrong, Jr., John A. Reddick, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Rubert D. Reddick, Deceased v. The City of Vernon, J.C. Armstrong, Jr., Coleman Armstrong
See Hunt v. Marchetti, 824 F.2d 916, 920 (11th Cir.1987) (error in exclusion of evidence not grounds for reversal unless it affects substantial rights) (citing Fed.R.Evid. 103(a); Fed.R.Civ.P. 61); see also Perry v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., 734 F.2d 1441, 1446 (11th Cir.1984) (party asserting error on appeal has burden of showing prejudice to substantial rights), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Budimir Matek Eleanor Matek Martin Matek Marijan Dusevic Mario Forgiarini Mary L. Forgiarini John Zivkovic Judith Zivkovic Vinco Marich Cvita Marich, and Rex Martin Carolyn Martin David A. Hill Diane S. Hill Ruth Thayer v. Joseph Murat Veronica M. Murat Chester J. Hummel Celia A. Hummel Ronald A. Lebetsamer Minor, Popeny & Lebetsamer Port Welding & MacHine Works, Inc. Profit Sharing Trust Fund West Coast Diesel, Inc. Orange Production Credit Association, Budimir Matek Eleanor Matek Martin Matek Marijan Dusevic Mario Forgiarini Mary L. Forgiarini, and Rex Martin Carolyn Martin David A. Hill Diane S. Hill Ruth Thayer v. Joseph Murat Veronica M. Murat Port Welding & MacHine Works, Inc. Profit Sharing Trust Fund West Coast Diesel, Inc., Budimir Matek Eleanor Matek Martin Matek Marijan Dusevic Mario Forgiarini Mary L. Forgiarini John Zivkovic Judith Zivkovic Vinco Marich Cvita Marich, and Rex Martin Carolyn Martin David A. Hill Diane S. Hill Ruth Thayer v. Joseph Murat Veronica M. Murat Chester J. Hummel Celia A. Hummel Ronald A. Lebetsamer Minor, Popeney & Lebetsamer Port Welding & MacHine Works, Inc. Profit Sharing Trust Fund West Coast Diesel, Inc. Orange Production Credit Association, Budimir Matek Eleanor Matek Martin Matek Marijan Dusevic Mario Forgiarini Mary L. Forgiarini Rex Martin Carolyn M. Martin David A. Hill Diane S. Hill Ruth Thayer v. Joseph Murat Veronica M. Murat Chester J. Hummel Celia A. Hummel Port Welding & MacHine Works, Inc. Profit Sharing Trust Fund West Coast Diesel, Inc., and Ronald A. Lebetsamer Minor, Popeney & Lebetsamer, Budimir Matek Eleanor Matek Martin Matek Marijan Dusevic Rex Martin Carolyn M. Martin David A. Hill Diane S. Hill Ruth Thayer, Plaintiffs v. Joseph Murat Veronica M. Murat Port Welding & MacHine Works, Inc. Profit Sharing Trust Fund West Coast Diesel, Inc., and Ronald A. Lebetsamer Minor, Popeney & Lebetsamer, Orange Production Credit Association, Budimir Matek v. Joseph Murat Veronica M. Murat Port Welding & MacHine Works, Inc. Profit Sharing Trust Fund
See Williamson, 645 F.2d at 422 ; see also Wolf v. Banco Nacional de Mexico, 549 F.Supp. 841 , 852 n. 17 (N.D.Cal.1982) (general partnership interest is not a security because the partners are mutual agents), rev'd on other grounds, 739 F.2d 1458, 1464 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985). 42 In the case at bar, the partnership agreement clearly creates a standard general partnership which on its face provided the plaintiffs with sufficient power to protect their investments.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Matek v. Murat
See Williamson, 645 F.2d at 422 ; see also Wolf v. Banco Nacional de Mexico, 549 F.Supp. 841 , 852 n. 17 (N.D.Cal.1982) (general partnership interest is not a security because the partners are mutual agents), rev’d on other grounds, 739 F.2d 1458, 1464 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Indag, S.A. v. Irridelco Corp.
See Indag S.A., 37 N.Y.2d at 525 , 375 N.Y.S.2d at 298 , 337 N.E.2d at 750 ; see also Islamic Republic of Iran v. Pahlavi, 62 N.Y.2d 474, 478-79, 484 , 478 N.Y.S.2d 597, 599, 602 , 467 N.E.2d 245, 247, 250 (1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1108 , 105 S.Ct. 783 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Tucker v. Whitaker Travel, Ltd.
See also Wolf v. Banco Nacional de Mexico, S.A., 739 F.2d 1458 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 784 , 83 L.Ed.2d 778 (1985) (where plaintiff, a United States resident, purchased certificates of deposit as a result of defendant’s advertising in the United States, the sale of CDs to plaintiff was a commercial activity carried on in the United States).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Perwin
v.
Wilentz, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of New Jersey
v.
Wilentz, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of New Jersey
No. 84-673.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 7, 1985.
Published
Citer courts: S.D. New York (1)
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.