green
Positive treatment
8.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 32 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. LANGSTEAD
See State v. Ammons, 105 Wash.2d 175, 187 , 713 P.2d 719 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986). ¶ 19 A conviction is valid on its face unless it shows constitutional infirmities without further elaboration.
discussed
Cited "see"
Royal v. Netherland
See Cola v. Reardon, 787 F.2d 681, 694 (1st Cir.1986) (“to require defendants to object to appellate tribunal errors prior to the appellate opinion is, in our view, to impose unreasonable demands of foresight”) (emphasis in. original), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Foster
See State v. Ammons, 105 Wash.2d 175, 185 , 713 P.2d 719 , 718 P.2d 796 (1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Blevio v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
Commissioner v. Estate of Bosch, 387 U.S. 456, 465 , 87 S.Ct. 1776, 1782 , 18 L.Ed.2d 886 (1967); Ground Air Transfer, Inc. v. Westates Airlines, Inc., 899 F.2d 1269, 1275 (1st Cir.1990); see Cola v. Reardon, 787 F.2d 681 , 688 n. 5 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986) (stating that the First Circuit was bound to apply a state appellate court’s statement of local law).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wayne Morris Reeves, Jr. v. James A. Collins, Director, Texas Dept. Of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division
See Harcon Barge Co., Inc. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 668 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); see also Craig v. Lynaugh, 846 F.2d 11, 13 (5th Cir.1988) (if service of process has not occurred, and “[i]f a judgment has been entered, a Rule 59(e) motion, or its legal equivalent, filed within 10 days after the date of entry of judgment is timely even though it has not been served on the defendants”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ortiz v. Dubois
(2×)
See Cola v. Reardon, 787 F.2d 681 , 688 n. 5 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); Tarrant v. Ponte, 751 F.2d 459, 464 (1st Cir.1985) 6 A waiver of the adequate and independent state ground arises where the state's highest court declines to affirm on the basis of state law and conducts a "detailed examination of federal law and federal cases ... necessary to decide a specific question of federal law." McCown v. Callahan, 726 F.2d 1, 3 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 839 , 105 S.Ct. 139 , 83 L.Ed.2d 78 (1984); see Doucette v. Vose, 842 F.2d 538, 540 …
cited
Cited "see"
Richardson v. Oldham
See Harcon Barge Co., Inc. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 669 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986). 7 .
cited
Cited "see"
James A. Latham, Marian E. Latham, Movant-Appellant v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
See Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 669 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Latham v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
See Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 669 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Tillman v. Cook
(2×)
See Cola v. Reardon, 787 F.2d 681, 700-01 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); United States v. Mosley, 786 F.2d 1330, 1335 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1184 , 106 S.Ct. 2919 , 91 L.Ed.2d 548 (1986); United States v. Castro, 776 F.2d 1118, 1121-22 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1029 , 106 S.Ct. 1233 , 89 L.Ed.2d 342 (1986); United States v. Parkhill, 775 F.2d 612, 615 (5th Cir.1985); United States v. Hayes, 775 F.2d 1279, 1282 (4th Cir.1985).
cited
Cited "see"
John C. Bertrand v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services
See Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, 784 F.2d 665 , 668-70 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Bertrand v. Sullivan
See Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, 784 F.2d 665 , 668–70 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Marshall Independent School District v. United States Gypsum Co.
See Harcon Barge Co., Inc. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 669-70 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986) (any motion filed within ten days of entry that calls into question correctness of judgment is functionally a motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), whatever its label).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. James Cronan
See Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 667-68 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lonnie Echols v. Joel T. Parker, State of Mississippi
See Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); Willie v. Continental Oil Co., 784 F.2d 706 (5th Cir.1986) (en banc).
discussed
Cited "see"
Munden v. Ultra-Alaska Associates
See Harcon Barge Co., Inc. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 667 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); Sunstream Jet Express, Inc. v. International Air Service Co. Ltd., 734 F.2d 1258, 1272-73 (7th Cir.1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Barbara Munden v. Ultra-Alaska Associates v. Flohr Metal Fabricators, Inc., Defendant-Third-Party-Plaintiff. Barbara Munden v. Ultra-Alaska Associates v. Dmc Properties, Inc., Third-Party-Plaintiff v. Flohr Metal Fabricators, Inc., Third-Party-Defendant-Appellant. Barbara Munden v. Ultra-Alaska Associates v. Flohr Metal Fabricators, Inc., Third-Party-Defendant, and Dmc Properties, Inc., Defendant-Third-Party-Plaintiff-Appellant
See Harcon Barge Co., Inc. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 667 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); Sunstream Jet Express, Inc. v. International Air Service Co. Ltd., 734 F.2d 1258, 1272-73 (7th Cir.1984). 34 The defendants' motion here is properly considered under Rule 59(e), as it sought a substantive change in the district court's decision, and the court's own opinion demonstrates that the motion did not require a merely "ministerial" act by the court. 35 3.
discussed
Cited "see"
Leonard Finch, Cross-Appellant v. City of Vernon, Etc., Cross-Appellee, Clark Rogers, J.C. Armstrong, Jr., Coleman Armstrong, Cross-Appellees. Rupert D. Reddick, Cross-Appellant v. City of Vernon, Etc., Cross-Appellees, J.C. Armstrong, Jr., Coleman Armstrong, Cross-Appellees
Other courts, recognizing that Rule 59(e) and Rule 60(b)(6) appear to overlap somewhat, have drawn a ten-day filing distinction, at least where a motion is being classified for the purpose of a tolling decision: "if a post-judgment motion is filed within ten days of the entry of judgment and calls into question the correctness of that judgment it should be treated as a motion under Rule 59(e), however it may be formally styled." Dove v. Codesco, 569 F.2d 807, 809 (4th Cir.1978) (citation omitted); see Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 669-70 (5th Cir.) (in banc), cert…
discussed
Cited "see"
Finch v. City of Vernon
Other courts, recognizing that Rule 59(e) and Rule 60(b)(6) appear to overlap somewhat, have drawn a ten-day filing distinction, at least where a motion is being classified for the purpose of a tolling decision: “if a post-judgment motion is filed within ten days of the entry of judgment and calls into question the correctness of that judgment it should be treated as a motion under Rule 59(e), however it may be formally styled.” Dove v. Codesco, 569 F.2d 807, 809 (4th Cir.1978) (citation omitted); see Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 669-70 (5th Cir.) (in banc), …
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Savides
See U.S. v. Salerno, 794 F.2d 64 (2d Cir.) cert. granted — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 397 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Marion Ray Mosley v. Officer M.D. Cozby
See Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 667 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Marvin L. Trosper
See United States v. Salerno, 794 F.2d 64 (2d Cir.), cert. granted, — U.S.-, 107 S.Ct. 397 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert Walker, United States of America v. Duon Walker
See United States v. Salerno, 794 F.2d 64 (2d Cir.), cert. granted, — U.S. —, 107 S.Ct. 397 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wayne Morris REEVES, Jr v. James A. COLLINS, Director, Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, et al
See Harcon Barge Co., Inc. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 668 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); see also Craig v. Lynaugh, 846 F.2d 11, 13 (5th Cir.1988) (if service of process has not occurred, and "[i]f a judgment has been entered, a Rule 59(e) motion, or its legal equivalent, filed within 10 days after the date of entry of judgment is timely even though it has not been served on the defendants").
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Watson
Compare Mail, 121 Wash.2d at 712 , 854 P.2d 1042 ("in order for a `procedural' appeal to be allowed under Ammons, it must be shown that the sentencing court had a duty to follow some specific procedure required by the SRA, and that the court failed to do so") with State v. Ammons, 105 Wash.2d 175, 183 , 713 P.2d 719 , 718 P.2d 796 ("[a]n appellant ... is not precluded from challenging on appeal the procedure by which a sentence within the standard range was imposed"), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Wadsworth
See, e.g., State v. Ammons, 105 Wn.2d 175, 180 , 713 P.2d 719 , 718 P.2d 796 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S. Ct. 398 , 93 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Wadsworth
See, e.g., State v. Ammons, 105 Wash.2d 175, 180 , 713 P.2d 719 , 718 P.2d 796 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); State v. Freitag, 127 Wash.2d 141, 144-45 , 896 P.2d 1254 , 905 P.2d 355 (1995). [57] See Geschwind, 121 Wash.2d at 841 , 854 P.2d 1061 . [58] Br. of Appellant at 16. [59] Id. at 16-19. [60] Id. at 16. [61] State v. Blilie, 132 Wash.2d 484, 489 , 939 P.2d 691 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Burt v. Ware
(2×)
See Fed.RAppP. 4(a)(4) (1979 version); see also Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 667 (5th *258 Cir.1986) (en banc), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986) (This court treats a motion which calls into question the correctness of the judgment, does not seek relief for purely clerical errors, and is served within ten days after the entry of judgment, as a Rule 59(e) motion for purposes of Rule 4(a)(4)); Woodham v. American Cystoscope Co., 335 F.2d 551, 554-56 (5th Cir.1964) (even motions captioned as Rule 60(b) motions are treated as a Rule 5…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Yvonne Dalton v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, a National Banking Association
See also Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 669 (5th Cir.) (en banc) (timely post-judgment motion within scope of Rule 59(e) treated under that rule), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 930 , 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986); Willie v. Continental Oil Co., 784 F.2d 706, 707 (5th Cir.1986) (en banc) (same); Charles v. Daley, 799 F.2d 343, 347 (7th Cir.1986) (adopting Harcon Rule); Elias v. Ford Motor Co., 734 F.2d 463, 466 (1st Cir.1984) (motion to change rate of interest must be made under Rule 59(e)); Stern v. Shouldice, 706 F.2d 742, 747 (6th Cir.) (discretionary prejudgmen…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bentley v. Bank of Coronado (In Re Crystal Sands Properties)
See also Harcon Barge Co. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc., 784 F.2d 665, 668 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 107 S.Ct. 398 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986) (establishing brightline test that motions within scope of F.R.C.P. 59(e) and served within 10 day time period must be treated as motions to alter or amend judgment).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Charles Kenneth Foster v. Richard L. Dugger, and Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Respondents
See, e.g., Burger v. Kemp, 753 F.2d 930, 937 (11th Cir.) (reasonable to terminate investigation into defendant's background where counsel made strategic decision to avoid emphasizing character evidence), vacated on other grounds, 474 U.S. 806 , 106 S.Ct. 41 , 88 L.Ed.2d 34 (1985), on remand, 785 F.2d 890 (11th Cir.), cert. granted, --- U.S. ----, 107 S.Ct. 397 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986). 19 24 After careful review of the record, we conclude that counsel formulated his trial strategy only after frequent consultations with his client and an informed evaluation of all his options.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Foster v. Dugger
See, e.g., Burger v. Kemp, 753 F.2d 930, 937 (11th Cir.) (reasonable to terminate investigation into defendant’s background where counsel made strategic decision to avoid emphasizing character evidence), vacated on other grounds, 474 U.S. 806 , 106 S.Ct. 41 , 88 L.Ed.2d 34 (1985), on remand, 785 F.2d 890 (11th Cir.), cert. granted, — U.S.-, 107 S.Ct. 397 , 93 L.Ed.2d 351 (1986). 19 After careful review of the record, we conclude that counsel formulated his trial strategy only after frequent consultations with his client and an informed evaluation of all his options.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Tanner
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 86-177.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 3, 1986.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari granted.