green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
5.2 score
“agent orange i”
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re Bolar Pharmaceutical Co., Inc., SEC. Lit.
agent orange i
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Bausch & Lomb, Inc. Securities Litigation
See In re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation, 818 F.2d 216, 223 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987) (court may award lump-sum fee to counsel and permit them to divide it among themselves under terms of private fee-sharing agreement based on relative value of individual attorneys’ services).
cited
Cited "see"
Barnes v. Outlaw
See Paul v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, 819 F.2d 875 , 878 n. 1 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
Tilton v. Marshall
(2×)
See Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc’y of New York, Inc., 819 F.2d 875, 879 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987); see also New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 282-83 , 84 S.Ct. 710, 727 , 11 L.Ed.2d 686 (1964); Carrieri v. Bush, 69 Wash.2d 536 , 419 P.2d 132, 137 (1966); McNamara v. Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 802 S.W.2d 901, 904 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1991, writ denied).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Boesky Securities Litigation
See In re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation, 818 F.2d 216, 223 (2nd Cir.) ("while the practice of allowing *560 class counsel to distribute a general fee award in an equitable fund case among themselves pursuant to a fee sharing agreement is unexceptional, we find that any such agreement must comport essentially with those principles of fee distribution set forth in Grinnell I and Grinnell II. "), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
Goodwin v. Boesky
See In re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation, 818 F.2d 216, 223 (2nd Cir.) (“while the practice of allowing class counsel to distribute a general fee award in an equitable fund case among themselves pursuant to a fee sharing agreement is unexceptional, we find that any such agreement must comport essentially with those principles of fee distribution set forth in Grinnell I and Grinnell II.”), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
Poindexter v. Armstrong
See Paul v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Soc. of New York, 819 F.2d 875, 880 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987); and Rasmussen v. Bennett, 228 Mont. 106 , 741 P.2d 755 (1987) wherein it was held that church statements condemning plaintiffs conduct and calling for shunning were privileged under the First Amendment.
discussed
Cited "see"
Brooks v. Hilton Casinos Inc.
See Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc’y, 819 F.2d 875, 879 (9th Cir.) (“Federal courts are not precluded from affording relief simply because neither the state Supreme Court nor the state legislature has enunciated a clear rule governing a particular type of controversy.”), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
John L. Brooks v. Hilton Casinos Incorporated, John L. Brooks v. Hilton Casinos Incorporated, D/B/A Las Vegas Hilton, a Nevada Corporation, John L. Brooks, Frederick Amie, Norman v. Ballard, Jack A. Bosarge, Robert A. Dawson, Douglas S. Delling, Alan Kirk Drake, Roger H. Dudley, and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellant v. Hilton Casinos Incorporated, D/B/A Las Vegas Hilton, a Nevada Corporation, Hilton Hotel Corporation
See Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc'y, 819 F.2d 875, 879 (9th Cir.) ("Federal courts are not precluded from affording relief simply because neither the state Supreme Court nor the state legislature has enunciated a clear rule governing a particular type of controversy."), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
Burgess v. Rock Creek Baptist Church
See Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc’y, 819 F.2d 875, 879-883 (9th Cir.) (even if conduct was tortious, Jehovah’s Witnesses’ “shunning” of disassociated member was part of church’s policy and was a privileged religious practice under First Amendment), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Roberts-Douglas v. Meares
(2×)
Compare Bear v. Reformed Mennonite Church, 462 Pa. 330 , 341 A.2d 105 (1975), with Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc’y, 819 F.2d 875 (9th Cir.) cert. denied,, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987); see Free Exercise, supra note 23, 93 A.L.R.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hal Roach Studios, Inc., a Delaware Corporation v. Richard Feiner and Company, Inc., a New York Corporation
Molsbergen v. United States, 757 F.2d 1016, 1020 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 473 U.S. 934 , 106 S.Ct. 30 , 87 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985); see also Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, 819 F.2d 875, 879 (9th Cir.) (“Federal courts are not precluded from affording relief simply because neither the State Supreme Court nor the state legislature has enunciated a clear rule governing a particular type of controversy.”), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987); Commercial Union Ins.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hal Roach Studios, Inc., a Delaware Corporation v. Richard Feiner and Company, Inc., a New York Corporation
Molsbergen v. United States, 757 F.2d 1016, 1020 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 473 U.S. 934 , 106 S.Ct. 30 , 87 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985); see also Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, 819 F.2d 875, 879 (9th Cir.) (“Federal courts are not precluded from affording relief simply because neither the State Supreme Court nor the state legislature has enunciated a clear rule governing a particular type of controversy.”), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 926 , 108 S.Ct. 289 , 98 L.Ed.2d 249 (1987); Commercial Union Ins.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
O'Donnell
v.
Local 165, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO
v.
Local 165, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO
No. 87-369.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 2, 1987.
Published
Citer courts: E.D. New York (2)
App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.