green
Positive treatment
11.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Rebecca K. Crossley (99-4076) Starla Grubich (99-4080),defendants-Appellants
The court reasoned that the Speedy Trial Act was enacted to guarantee a defendant a minimum of thirty days to prepare a defense and that in order “[t]o fulfill this policy, the 30-day period should commence only after the indictment or information has been filed and made public and a defendant has first appeared with counsel engaged or appointed to represent him at trial.” Id.; see also United States v. Storm, 36 F.3d 1289, 1293 (5th Cir.1994) (adopting the Daly court’s reasoning and commencing the thirty-day period on the date on which the district court appointed new counsel after dete…
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Storm
But see United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508, 1520 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1100 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985) (expressly declined to adopt the reasoning of the Ninth Circuit in Daly, supra, finding that Congress did not have any "particular type of counsel in mind.”) (emphasis in original). .
discussed
Cited "but see"
Minor v. State
(2×)
But cf. United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1100 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985) (applying extended Helm analysis to sixty year sentence with parole); Whitmore v. Maggio, 742 F.2d 230 (5th Cir.1984) (sentences of fifty and seventy-five years without benefit of parole must receive Helm proportionality analysis).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. v. Neal
Guran Co. v. City of Akron, 546 F.2d 201, 204 (6th Cir.1976); see also In re Miller, 124 Fed.App’x. 152, 154-56 (4th Cir.2005) (unpublished) (determining that no private right of action arises from violation of NHA loss mitigation provisions); see generally Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525, 1531-32 (7th Cir.1984) (“Efforts to enforce implied causes of action under the National Housing Legislation or the HUD Handbook, have frequently come under consideration of appellate courts, and have always failed.”), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Neal v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc.
See Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525, 1531-32 (7th Cir.1984) *753 (citing numerous instances of “[ejfforts to enforce implied causes of action under the National Housing Legislation or the HUD Handbook,” all of which have failed in appellate courts), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); Shivers v. Landrieu, 674 F.2d 906, 911-12 (D.C.Cir.1981) (finding that the National Housing Act does not provide for an implied private right of action); Falzarano v. United States, 607 F.2d 506, 509-11 (1st Cir.1979) (stating that the National Housing Act does not provide …
discussed
Cited "see"
Arneson v. Sullivan
(2×)
See Sears v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry., 749 F.2d 1451 , 1456 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gilmore v. List & Clark Construction Co.
(2×)
See Sears v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry., Co., in which the Tenth Circuit denied a union's request to apportion fault between it and the defendant employer in a Title VII action, finding that the Supreme Court, in Northwest Airlines, "was unwilling to create a contribution remedy for a statutory violation when Congress had not *1313 manifested an intent that a right of contribution should exist.” 749 F.2d 1451 , 1444 (10th Cir.1984), ce rt. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985). 6 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Miguel Navarro-Espinosa
(2×)
See United States v. Sterling, *1172 742 F.2d 521, 527 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Edward Lee Baker, AKA \Eddie\"
(2×)
Sec. 848 (c); see United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 525 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Baker
(2×)
In his closing argument, the prosecutor told the jury that they would “have to make individual decisions as to whether each and every one of [the CCE defendants] satisfied the essential [CCE] elements beyond a reasonable doubt.” In order to convict a defendant under § 848, the government must show that (1) the defendant committed a felony violation of federal narcotics law which was (2) part of a continuing series of three or more violations (3) undertaken in concert with five or more persons (4) with respect to whom the defendant acted as an organizer, supervisor, or manager, 17 and (5) …
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ernesto Antone, Sr.
(2×)
See United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 527 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Douglas Hauck
See Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525, 1529 (7th Cir.1984) (HUD Handbook “intended for internal use for the information and guidance of HUD officials” and “ ‘has no binding force’ ”) (quoting Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool Corp., 728 F.2d 1423, 1439 (Fed.Cir.1984)), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Whitaker v. Clementon Housing Authority
See Burroughs v. Hills, 564 F.Supp. 1007, 1015 (N.D.Ill.1983), aff'd, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); Estrada v. Hills, 401 F.Supp. 429, 437 (N.D.Ill.1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
Olenhouse v. Commodity Credit Corp.
(2×)
See Sears v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry., 749 F.2d 1451 , 1456 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Laurie Jane Luttrell, United States of America v. William Dale Kegley, Aka: Bill Kegley
(2×)
See United States v. Jenrette, 744 F.2d 817, 824 (D.C.Cir.) (no constitutional violation where FBI targeted defendant without "reasonable suspicion" of wrongdoing), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1984); United States v. Gamble, 737 F.2d 853, 860 (10th Cir.1984) ("government need not have reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing in order to conduct an undercover investigation"); United States v. Jannotti, 673 F.2d 578, 608-09 (3d Cir.1982) (en banc) (rejecting "reasonable basis" test), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 880 , 105 S.Ct. 243 , 83 L.Ed.2d 182 (1984); United States v.…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Martinez
See United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508 (11th Cir.), reh'g denied, 749 F.2d 733 (1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1100 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985) (court noted, however, that it has not ruled out the possibility of a narrow exception to the Ker-Frisbie doctrine).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Phillip H. Nicely
See United States v. Jenrette, 744 F.2d 817 (D.C.Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); United States v. Kelly, 707 F.2d 1460 (D.C.Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 908 , 104 S.Ct. 264 , 78 L.Ed.2d 247 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Manuel Vasquez and Jose Pollo Renteria
See United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508, 1516-19 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1100 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985); United States v. Novak, 715 F.2d at 814-15 .
cited
Cited "see"
Merritt Logan, Inc. v. Fleming Companies, Inc. (In re Merritt Logan, Inc.)
See United States v. Olgin, 745 F.2d 263, 268 (3d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Merritt Logan, Inc., Debtor-In-Possession. Merritt Logan, Inc. D/B/A Rancocas Thriftway v. Fleming Companies, Inc. Fleming Foods of Pennsylvania, Inc. Hussman Refrigeration, Inc. And Engineering & Refrigeration, Inc., Appeal of Engineering and Refrigeration, Inc., at No. 89-1522 in Re Merritt Logan, Inc. Debtor-In-Possession. Merritt Logan, Inc. D/B/A Rancocas Thriftway v. Fleming Companies, Inc. Fleming Foods of Pennsylvania, Inc. Hussman Refrigeration, Inc. And Engineering & Refrigeration, Inc. Appeal of Hussman Refrigeration, Inc., at No. 89-1523 in Re Merritt Logan, Inc. Debtor-In-Possession. Merritt Logan, Inc. D/B/A Rancocas Thriftway v. Fleming Companies, Inc. Fleming Foods of Pennsylvania, Inc. Hussman Refrigeration, Inc. And Engineering & Refrigeration, Inc. Appeal of Merritt Logan, Inc., at No. 89-1524 in Re Merritt Logan, Inc. Debtor-In-Possession. Merritt Logan, Inc. D/B/A Rancocas Thriftway v. Fleming Companies, Inc. Fleming Foods of Pennsylvania, Inc. Hussman Refrigeration, Inc. And Engineering & Refrigeration, Inc. Appeal of Fleming Companies, Inc. And Fleming Foods of Pennsylvania, Inc. At No. 89-1525
See United States v. Olgin, 745 F.2d 263, 268 (3d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Donaciano Hernandez-Escarsega
(3×)
See United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 525 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985). 4 For purposes of the second element, “continuing series” has been interpreted by the courts as consisting of three or more federal narcotics violations.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Larry Thomas (87-1623), Anthony L. Gaston (87-1634), and Eddie Gaston (87-1697)
(2×)
See United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 527 (9th Cir.1984) (holding that prosecutorial error does not warrant reversal unless substantial prejudice results), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Joseph Charles Bonanno, Jr.
(2×)
See United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 527 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Matta-Ballesteros
See United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508, 1531 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1100 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ardis Knutzen v. Eben Ezer Lutheran Housing Center
See Donovan v. Wollaston Alloys, Inc., 695 F.2d 1, 9 (1st Cir.1982); accord Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, U.S. [1099], 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985). 59 Brecker, 798 F.2d at 57. 60 We are in accord with the Second Circuit and conclude as they do that HUD did not violate Sec. 552 of the APA and the memoranda may be relied upon to the extent that we have. 61 Section 553(b) requires that "rule makers" publish notice of proposed rule making in the Federal Register.
cited
Cited "see"
Knutzen v. Eben Ezer Lutheran Housing Center
See Donovan v. Wollaston Alloys, Inc., 695 F.2d 1, 9 (1st Cir.1982); accord Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, [471] U.S. [1099], 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Fred M. Mosely
See United States v. Olgin, 745 F.2d 263, 268-70 (3d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. David P. Twomey
See United States v. Olgin, 745 F.2d 263 (3d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); United States v. Sans, 731 F.2d 1521 , reh’g denied, 738 F.2d 451 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1111 , 105 S.Ct. 791 , 83 L.Ed.2d 785 (1985). 11 .
cited
Cited "see"
Brecker v. Queens B'nai B'rith Housing Development Fund Co.
See Donovan v. Wollaston Alloys, Inc., 695 F.2d 1, 9 (1st Cir.1982); accord Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S.—, 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
Brecker v. Queens B'nai B'rith Housing Development Fund Co.
See Donovan v. Wollaston Alloys, Inc., 695 F.2d 1, 9 (1st Cir.1982); accord Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James Kenneth Roberts, AKA Harold Weber, United States of America v. Clifton Lee Hawk
(2×)
See United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 524 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Thomas Calvin Ricks, A/K/A Joe Dancer, United States of America v. James A. Carter, United States of America v. Marcell Moffatt, A/K/A Black Barney, United States of America v. Stanley Rodgers, United States of America v. Kerney William Lindsey, A/K/A Wilco, United States of America v. Clifton Leo Frisby, United States of America v. Beatrice Roberts, United States of America v. Maurice David King, A/K/A Peanut
(2×)
See United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 526 (9 Cir.1984), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985) United States v. Sinito, 723 F.2d 1250, 1261 (6 Cir.1983), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 86 , 83 L.Ed.2d 33 (1984); United States v. Graziano, 710 F.2d 691 , 697 n. 11 (11 Cir.1983), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 1910 , 80 L.Ed.2d 459 (1984); United States v. Samuelson, 697 F.2d 255, 259 (8 Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1038 , 104 S.Ct. 1314 , 79 L.Ed.2d 711 (1984); United States v. Losada, 674 F.2d 167 , 174 n. 4 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 457 U…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ricks
(2×)
See United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 526 (9 Cir.1984), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); United States v. Sinito, 723 F.2d 1250, 1261 (6 Cir.1983), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 86 , 83 L.Ed.2d 33 (1984); United States v. Graziano, 710 F.2d 691 , 697 n. 11 (11 Cir.1983), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 1910 , 80 L.Ed.2d 459 (1984); United States v. Samuelson, 697 F.2d 255, 259 (8 Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1038 , 104 S.Ct. 1314 , 79 L.Ed.2d 711 (1984); United States v. Losada, 674 F.2d 167 , 174 n. 4 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 457 U.S. 1125 , 102…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Joe S. Gonzales
See United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508 , 1532 n. 22 (11th Cir.1984) (stating that rule 32(c)(3)(D) “does not purport to state the requirements of due process”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, -, 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 2323, 85 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Presidential Village, LLC v. Perkins
See, e.g., Burroughs v. Hills , 741 F.2d 1525 , 1529 (7th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S. Ct. 2321 , 85 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gambone
See also United States v. Olgin, 745 F.2d 263, 266 (3d Cir.1984) (involving the use of corporate checks to fictitious payees to generate cash proceeds and failure to record and issue receipts for cash sales), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Thorp
See also United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508 , 1526-27 n. 11 (11th Cir.1984), cert. den. sub nom Yamanis v. United States, 471 U.S. 1100 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985) (stating that under the Solem test, "the court may consider the crime actually committed as well as the crime generally proscribed"); State v. Lindsey, 203 Wis.2d 423 , 554 N.W.2d 215, 219-20 , rev. den. 205 Wis.2d 136 , 555 N.W.2d 816 (1996) (examining the ages of the parties and other specifics of the defendant's offense, sexual assault of a child, under the first step of the Solem analysis); State v. Bartlett, 164…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Walker
United States v. Kelly, 707 F.2d 1460, 1476-77 (D.C.Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 908 , 104 S.Ct. 264 , 78 L.Ed.2d 247 (1983) (footnotes omitted); see also United States v. Jenrette, 744 F.2d 817, 823 (D.C.Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Erickson v. Erickson
(2×)
See also Sears v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., 749 F.2d 1451, 1454 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, sub nom, United Transportation Union v. Sears, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); Collini v. Wean United, Inc., 101 F.R.D. 408, 410-11 (W.D.Pa.1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
MAPCO International Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
See also Exxon v. Dept. of Energy, 752 F.2d 650 (Temp.Em.Ct.App.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985) (specific formulations of noticed subject matter not required in advance if path of agency is reasonably discernible in the rule-making).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Edward Chin
Accord United States v. Luttrell, 923 F.2d 764, 764 (9th Cir.1991) (en banc); United States v. Jacobson, 916 F.2d 467, 469 (8th Cir.1990) (en banc), cert. granted, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 1618 , 113 L.Ed.2d 716 (1991); United States v. Gamble, 737 F.2d 853, 860 (10th Cir.1984); United States v. Thoma, 726 F.2d 1191, 1198 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1228 , 104 S.Ct. 2683 , 81 L.Ed.2d 878 (1984); see also United States v. Jenrette, 744 F.2d 817 , 824 n. 13 (D.C.Cir.1984) (rejecting reasonable suspicion requirement in context of undercover investigations of public officials), cert. denied, 4…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Donald Whoie
On the first question the accused has the burden; on the second the prosecution has it.” 591 F.2d at 911 (quoting Sherman, 200 F.2d at 882-83 ); see, e.g., United States v. Jenrette, 744 F.2d 817, 821-22 (D.C.Cir.1984), ce rt. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); see also United States v. Rubio, 709 F.2d 146, 151 (2d Cir.1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
James Alfonso Greene v. United States
Parks v. United States, 832 F.2d 1244, 1246 (11th Cir.1987) (“Due process protects a defendant’s right not to be sentenced on the basis of false information and invalid premises.”) (citing United States v. Tucker, 404 U.S. 443 , 92 S.Ct. 589 , 30 L.Ed.2d 592 (1972)); see also United States v. Darby, 744 F.2d 1508, 1532 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1100 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 -23, 85 L.Ed.2d 841 (1985).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Arthur King
See, e.g., U.S. v. Jenrette, 744 F.2d 817, 820-21 (D.C.Cir.1984), cer t. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); U.S. v. Ciambrone, 601 F.2d 616 (2d Cir.1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Joe Fedroff. Appeal of Joseph Fedroff
See also United States v. Jenrette, 744 F.2d 817, 822 (D.C.Cir.1984) (defendant found predisposed when “he exhibits a ‘state of mind which readily responds to the opportunity furnished by the [government] to commit [the crime].’ ”) (quoting United States v. Burkley, 591 F.2d 903, 916 (D.C.Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 966 , 99 S.Ct. 1516 , 59 L.Ed.2d 782 (1979)), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985). 3 .
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jose Jader Alvarez-Moreno, A/K/A Carlos Jader Alvarez, Said Pavon Jatter, Ricardo Pavon Jatter
(4×)
Compare United States v. Rivera, 837 F.2d 906, 919 (10th Cir.) (no counts of indictment gave defendant notice that government would use acts to support continuing series element), reh’g en banc granted 847 F.2d 660 (1988) with United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521, 523 (9th Cir.1984) (indictment had eleven counts), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); United States v. Michel, 588 F.2d 986 , 1000 n. 15 (5th Cir) (defendant convicted of six counts of narcotics violations incorporated in the CCE count), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 825 , 100 S.Ct. 47 , 62 L.Ed.2d 32…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Echeverri, Elkin A.
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Sterling, 742 F.2d 521 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); Sperling v. United States, 692 F.2d 223 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied 462 U.S. 1131 , 103 S.Ct. 3111 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1366 (1983). 5 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Galloway Farms, Inc. v. United States
See also Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); Annotation, Implication of Private Right of Action from Provision of Federal Statute not Expressly Providing for One--Supreme Court Cases, 61 L.Ed.2d 910 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Galloway Farms, Inc. v. United States
See also Burroughs v. Hills, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2321 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); Annotation, Implication of Private Right of Action from Provision of Federal Statute not Expressly Providing for One — Supreme Court Cases, 61 L.Ed.2d 910 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sheftelman v. Jones
(2×)
See e.g., Sears v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway, 749 F.2d 1451 , 1456 (10th Cir.1984), ce rt. denied sub nom., 471 U.S. 1099 , 105 S.Ct. 2322 , 85 L.Ed.2d 840 (1985); Rishcoff v. Commodity Fluctuations Systems, Inc., 111 F.R.D. 381, 385 (E.D.Pa.1986). 3.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Sterling
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 84-1177.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 13, 1985.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.