green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
8.4 score
“e do not suggest that an attorney-client privilege is lost by the mere fact that the information communicated is otherwise available to the public. the privilege attaches not to the information but to the communication of the information.”
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 37 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re Federal Grand Jury Proceedings 89-10 (Mia)
e do not suggest that an attorney-client privilege is lost by the mere fact that the information communicated is otherwise available to the public. the privilege attaches not to the information but to the communication of the information.
discussed
Cited "see"
Bryant v. Food Lion, Inc.
See Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984) (finding comprehensive statistical data far more persuasive indicia of company-wide practices than the isolated anecdotes offered by plaintiffs.) 42 .
cited
Cited "see"
State Ex Rel. Cooper v. Caperton
See Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326, 332 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Williams v. 5300 Columbia Pike Corp.
See Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326 , 336 n. 18 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Stier v. United States
See Fiumara v. United States, 727 F.2d 209 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Upton
See United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 229 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Comair Rotron, Inc. v. Minebea Co.
Knogo Corp. v. United States, 213 U.S.P.Q. 936 , 940 (Ct.Cl.1980); see United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064 , 1073 n. 8 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jose Pagan Campino v. United States
See Fiumara v. United States, 727 F.2d 209 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984) (finding, inter alia, that failure to move to suppress evidence prior to trial as required by Fed.R.Crim.P. 12(f) constituted a procedural bar to a § 2255 motion unless defendant could show cause and prejudice); Indiviglio v. United States, 612 F.2d 624 (2d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 933 , 100 S.Ct. 1326 , 63 L.Ed.2d 768 (1980); Foreman v. United States, 1991 WL 8406 , 1991 U.S. Dist.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Urbana
See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1075 (2d Cir.1982) (before disqualifying counsel, district court must first pass on the admissibility of evidence implicating counsel), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
William C. Brennan v. United States
See Fiumara v. United States, 727 F.2d 209, 213-14 (2d Cir.) (applying Frady primarily to failure to raise nonconstitutional and nonjurisdictional objection at trial but also noting failure to raise issue on appeal), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Gary Washington and Jeffrey Shepard
See United States v. *353 Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 227 (2d Cir.1983), ce rt. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984); United States v. Bonacorsa, 528 F.2d 1218, 1221-22 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 935 , 96 S.Ct. 2647 , 49 L.Ed.2d 386 (1976); United States v. Goldstein, 168 F.2d 666, 671-72 (2d Cir.1948).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Perez
See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064 (2nd Cir.1982), cert. den. 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
O'Neill v. Krzeminski
See United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984); United States v. Mowad, 641 F.2d 1067 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 817 , 102 S.Ct. 94 , 70 L.Ed.2d 86 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
O'Neill v. Krzeminski
See United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984); United States v. Mowad, 641 F.2d 1067 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 817 , 102 S.Ct. 94 , 70 L.Ed.2d 86 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Simmons v. Marsh
See Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326, 338 (4th Cir. 1983) (inference of discriminatory intent from hiring data is not warranted in determining whether discriminatory intent was the cause of disparity in promotions data where there was no evidence that supervisory personnel in hiring and promotion contexts were the same), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984). 26 .
cited
Cited "see"
51 Fair empl.prac.cas. 151, 45 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 37,605 Linda Eldredge, on Behalf of Herself and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Carpenters 46 Northern California Counties Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee
See Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326 , 336 n. 17 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Eldredge v. Carpenters 46 Northern California Counties Joint Apprenticeship & Training Committee
See Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326 , 336 n. 17 (4th Cir.1983), ce rt. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Murad Nersesian
See United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 230 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Turoff
See United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 230 (2d Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Anwar v. United States
See United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Vasta
United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1435 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985); accord United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 230 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Autry v. North Carolina Department of Human Resources
See Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326, 338 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984); McCann v. Delaware River Port Authority, 548 F.Supp. 1206, 1214 (E.D.Penn.1982) (Title VII not violated when foreman who made racial slurs had no input into employment decision affecting plaintiff), aff'd, 725 F.2d 669 (3rd Cir.1983). (8) Without direct or indirect evidence of discrimination, the Plaintiff must resort to the McDonnell Douglas proof scheme to establish a prima facie case.
cited
Cited "see"
Warren v. Halstead Industries, Inc.
See Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326 , 336 n. 20 (4th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, — U.S. ---, 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Benzion Golomb
See United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 230 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. O'Connor
See also Fiumara v. United States, 727 F.2d 209, 212 (2d Cir.) (“A trial counsel worthy of the name should be capable of subordinating his personal predilections to his professional duty.” (internal quotation marks omitted)), cert, denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Shabbir v. Pakistan International Airlines
Motions for disqualification, such as the one presently pending before this Court, require the Court to “preserve a balance, delicate though it may be, between an individual’s right to his own freely chosen counsel and the need to maintain the highest ethical standards of professional responsibility.” Emle Indus., Inc. v. Patentex, Inc., 478 F.2d 562 , 564-65 (2d Cir.1973); see also United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1071 (2d Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bryson v. Fluor Corp.
See, e.g., Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326 , 334—35 (4th Cir.1983) (Title VII), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984); Oscar Mayer & Co. v. Evans, 441 U.S. 750 , 758 n. 6, 99 S.Ct. 2066 , 2073 n. 6, 60 L.Ed.2d 609 (1979) (ADEA).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. David M. Dale, United States of America v. Michelle Ashton, United States of America v. Martin Segal, United States of America v. Automated Data Management, Inc., United States of America v. Terence Sweeney
See, e.g., United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 228-29 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984) 51 Defendants emphasize the instruction that the jury could convict if it found "that the Government has established beyond a reasonable doubt that any one of these items was falsely reported on the return." Tr. 4533 52 Defendants also argue that this omission, and other errors asserted in connection with the section 1001 convictions, affect the conspiracy convictions.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Dale
See, e.g., United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 228-29 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Michalek
See, e.g., Fiumara v. United States, 727 F.2d 209, 213 (2d Cir.) (failure to raise alleged illegality of wiretap in suppression motion waived the objection), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984); United States v. Hart, 729 F.2d 662, 665 (10th Cir.1984) (claim that confession was obtained in violation of Miranda was waived by failure to make motion to suppress prior to trial), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1161 , 105 S.Ct. 914 , 83 L.Ed.2d 927 (1985); United States v. Schwartz, 535 F.2d 160, 163 (2d Cir.1976) (failure to raise, in pretrial suppression motion, claim that …
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Kevin Camisa
See, e.g., United States v. Cunningham, 672 F.2d 1064, 1070 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Grey v. Henderson
See (N.Y.C.P.L. § 200.40[1]); People v. Bornholdt, 33 N.Y.2d 75 , 350 N.Y.S.2d 369 , 305 N.E.2d 461 , cert. denied, 416 U.S. 905 , 94 S.Ct. 1609 , 40 L.Ed.2d 109 (1974); see also United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 230 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984) (denial of severance “will be reversed only upon the appellant’s successfully assuming the heavy burden of showing that he suffered substantial prejudice due to joint trial”). *696 Grey's claim that he was denied the right to testify is meritless.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Charles E. Wagner, for Himself and Others Similarly Situated v. Reese H. Taylor, Jr., Chairman, Interstate Commerce Commission
(2×)
Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156, 177 , 94 S.Ct. 2140, 2152 , 40 L.Ed.2d 732, 748 (1974); see also Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326, 332-333 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984) (court must be “concerned with the commonality (not the apparent merit) of the claims"); Kuck v. Berkey Photo, Inc., 81 F.R.D. 736, 739 (S.D.N.Y.1979) (”[o]nce plaintiffs have demonstrated ... a reasonable basis for crediting the assertion that aggrieved individuals do exist in the broader class they propose, then it is inappropriate for this…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Nunez
See also Fiumara v. United States, 727 F.2d 209 (2nd Cir.) cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984) (Defendant’s claim that a judge’s order for wire-tap did not comply with statutory requirements was neither jurisdictional nor constitutional in nature and did not constitute a fundamental defect which inherently resulted in a complete miscarraige of justice; thus, the claim was not cognizable under the statute governing the motions). b.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Clara Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust
(2×)
See also Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326, 334 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984) (although claims of individual and class wide discriminatory termination overlapped on several important pieces of proof with claims of discrimination in promotions, the district court properly denied broad class certification because promotions claims raised significant issues of proof separate from those evidentiary issues implicated by the termination claims) 9 Contrary to the assertion of the dissent, this Court does not hold that the actual pro…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Coates v. Johnson & Johnson
(2×)
See, e.g., Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326 , 336 & n. 20 (4th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984); Pegues v. Mississippi State Employment Service of the Mississippi Employment Security Commission, 699 F.2d 760, 765 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 482 , 78 L.Ed.2d 679 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Coates v. Johnson & Johnson
(2×)
See, e.g., Lilly v. Harris-Teeter Supermarket, 720 F.2d 326 , 336 & n. 20 (4th Cir.1983), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 539 (1984); Pegues v. Mississippi State Employment Service of the Mississippi Employment Security Commission, 699 F.2d 760, 765 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 482 , 78 L.Ed.2d 679 (1983).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Harris-Teeter Super Markets, Inc.
v.
Lilly
v.
Lilly
No. 83-1474.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 23, 1984.
Published
Citer courts: Eleventh Circuit (1)
C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.