green
Positive treatment
9.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Alemayehu v. Abere
(2×)
See United States v. Philip Morris, Inc., 116 F.Supp.2d 131, 135 (D.D.C.2000) (first citing Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1506 (D.C.Cir.1984), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985); and then citing Shear v. Nat'l Rifle Ass’n of Am., 606 F.2d 1251, 1253 (D.C.Cir.1979)). 2 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Devincci Hourani v. Alexander Mirtchev
(2×)
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500 , 1533 n. 143 (D.C.Cir.1984), certiorari granted, judgment vacated on other grounds by Weinberger v. Ramirez de Arellano, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Helmerich & Payne International Drilling Co. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
(2×)
Because the Supreme Court did not address Ramirez’s holding that the shareholders had property rights in their corporation’s assets, but instead vacated and remanded in light of the U.S. military’s subsequent withdrawal of all personnel and facilities from the plaintiffs’ land, De Arellano v. Weinberger, 788 F.2d 762, 764 (D.C.Cir.1986) (en banc) (per curiam); see Weinberger v. Ramirez de Arellano, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985), that holding continues to have “precedential weight,” Adewani, 467 F.3d at 1342 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Sum of $70,990,605
(2×)
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1538 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc) (agreeing with the district court that a conversion to summary judgment “is clearly impermissible under the[] circumstances” because there were "essential disputes as to the material facts in the case” (internal quotation marks omitted)), judgment vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985); e.g., McMillan ex. rel.
cited
Cited "see"
Helmerich & Payne International Drilling Co. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
See 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2358 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pettaway v. Teachers Insurance & Annuity Ass'n of America
(2×)
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1537 (D.C.Cir.1984) (“Ordinarily, in reviewing motions for summary judgment, the appellate court considers only those matters presented to the district court, disregarding additional allegations raised for the first time on appeal.”), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985); District of Columbia v. Air Florida, Inc., 750 F.2d 1077, 1084 (D.C.Cir.1984); Tarpley v. Greene, 684 F.2d 1 , 7 n. 17 (D.C.Cir. 1982).
examined
Cited "see"
Fund for Animals, Inc. v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management
(4×)
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500 , 1537 & n. 163 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc) ("Unless the new issue uncovered by the appellate court was one which was clearly framed by the proceedings below so that the parties had a legitimate chance to submit all relevant materials and argue their implications, it is clearly unjust for the appellate court to direct the issuance of summary judgment on a new issue raised sua sponte on appeal.") (collecting citations), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985). 37 The very legal authority relied upon by th…
discussed
Cited "see"
Abu Ali v. Ashcroft
(2×)
See Weinberger v. Ramirez de Arellano, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Custer County Action Ass'n v. Garvey
(2×)
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1523 (D.C.Cir.1984), vacated on other grounds by 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985); Del-Rio Drilling Programs Inc. v. United States, 146 F.3d 1358, 1362-63 (Fed.Cir.1998).
examined
Cited "see"
Ashkir v. United States
(4×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 724 F.2d 143 , 155 n. 18 (D.C.Cir.1983) (Scalia, J.), rehearing granted, 745 F.2d 1500 (D.C.Cir.1984), ce rt. granted and vacated, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985) (noting that Porter did not address a claim by a foreign corporation "with regard to action outside the jurisdiction of the United States”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Lee
(2×)
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1537 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc) (citing Frank C. *1142 Bailey Enterprises, Inc. v. Cargill, Inc., 582 F.2d 333, 334 (5th Cir.1978), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985)); Charbonnages de France v. Smith, 597 F.2d 406 , 416 & n. 9 (4th Cir.1979) (dictum); Box v. A & P Tea Co., 772 F.2d 1372, 1376 (7th Cir.1985) (citing Frank C.
discussed
Cited "see"
Transcapital Financial Corporation v. Director, Office Of Thrift Supervision
(2×)
See id. at 600-06 . 2 In Transohio we explained that the Ramirez exception (see Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1527 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985)) permitted a United States District Court to exercise jurisdiction over a takings claim for injunctive relief when the monetary compensation available exclusively in the Federal Court of Claims would be wholly inadequate to compensate the complainant for the alleged taking. 967 F.2d at 613 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Forti v. Suarez-Mason
(2×)
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1534 (D.C.Cir.1984) fen banc) (movant must make a "factual showing that an act of state has occurred, coupled with a legal showing that no bar to the doctrine is applicable under the factual circumstances"), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985). 10 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Allen Sharp, Lieutenant Colonel, United States Air Force Reserves v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Defense
(2×)
See Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500 , *1524 1525 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc), vacated on other grounds, — U.S. —, 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985); id. at 1553 (Scalia, J., dissenting); see also North Side Lumber, 753 F.2d at 1484-86 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rangel v. Boehner
(2×)
The precise contours of the political question doctrine remain “ ‘murky and unsettled.’ ” Harbury v. Hayden, 522 F.3d 413, 418 (D.C.Cir.2008) (quoting Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Repub., 726 F.2d 774 , 803 n. 3 (D.C.Cir.1984) (Bork, J., concurring)); see also Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1514 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985) (describing the “shifting contours and uncertain underpinnings” of the political question doctrine).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Al-Aulaqi v. Obama
(2×)
The precise “ ‘contours’ ” of the political question doctrine remain “ ‘murky and unsettled.’ ” Harbury v. Hayden, 522 F.3d 413, 418 (D.C.Cir.2008) (quoting Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic, 726 F.2d 774 , 803 n. 3 (D.C.Cir.1984) (Bork, J., concurring)); see also Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1514 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985) (describing the “shifting contours and uncertain underpinnings” of the political question doctrine).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Fideicomiso De La Tierra v. Fortuno
(2×)
Under those circumstances, a "plaintiff that proves that a government entity has taken its property for a private, not a public, use is entitled to an injunction against the unconstitutional taking, not simply compensation." Carole Media, 550 F.3d at 308 ; see also Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1521-22 (D.C.Cir.1984), rev'd on other grounds sub nom, Weinberger v. Ramirez de Arellano, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Peña v. Fortuño
(2×)
Under those circumstances, a “plaintiff that proves that a government entity has taken its property for a private, not a public, use is entitled to an injunction against the unconstitutional taking, not simply compensation.” Carole Media, 550 F.3d at 308 ; see also Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1521-22 (D.C.Cir.1984), rev’d on other grounds sub nom, Weinberger v. Ramirez de Arellano, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Linder v. Calero Portocarrero
(2×)
See also Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1512 (D.C.Cir.1984) (en banc), vacated on other grounds, 471 U.S. 1113 , 105 S.Ct. 2353 , 86 L.Ed.2d 255 (1985); Committee of United States Citizens Living in Nicaragua v. Reagan, 859 F.2d 929, 935 (D.C.Cir.1988).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jack H. Brown & Co. Inc.
v.
Northwest Sign Co.
v.
Northwest Sign Co.
No. 84-1605.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 20, 1985.
Published
Appeal from Sup. Ct. Tex. dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari denied.