Forro Precision, Inc. v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp., 471 U.S. 1130 (1985). · Go Syfert
Search
Forro Precision, Inc. v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp., 471 U.S. 1130 (1985). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
46 citation events across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Mittelman v. Witous (ill, 1990-04-09) · Strongest negative: United States v. Ricardo Bordallo, Governor of Guam (ca9, 1988-08-30)
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985 2005 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" United States v. Ricardo Bordallo, Governor of Guam
9th Cir. · 1988 · signal: but cf. · confidence high
But cf. United States v. Wesley, 748 F.2d 962, 964 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1130 , 105 S.Ct. 2664 , 86 L.Ed.2d 281 (1985) (holding that “urging and advising” witness to testify falsely violates section 1512 without indicating whether there was intimidation or misleading conduct).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mittelman v. Witous (2×)
Ill. · 1990 · confidence medium
Justice Rehnquist noted that lower courts had seized upon the word “opinion” in Gertz to “solve with a meat axe a very subtle and difficult question, totally oblivious ‘of the rich and complex history of the struggle of the common law to deal with this problem.’ ” ( 471 U.S. at 1129 , 86 L.
discussed Cited "see" Pellegrino Food Products Co. v. City of Warren (2×)
W.D. Pa. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ottensmeyer v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. of Maryland, 756 F.2d 986, 993 (4th Cir.1985) (citing Forro Precision, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corp., 673 F.2d 1045, 1060 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1130 , 105 S.Ct. 2664 , 86 L.Ed.2d 280 (1985)).
discussed Cited "see" Caesar Electronics Inc. v. Andrews (2×)
9th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See Forro Precision, Inc. v. IBM, 745 F.2d 1283, 1286 (9th Cir.1984) ("Forro II "), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1130 , 105 S.Ct. 2664 , 86 L.Ed.2d 280 (1985). 18 Caesar attempts to distinguish our Forro decisions by arguing that Fairchild's act of approaching Customs deprives it of the benefit of immunity.
discussed Cited "see" Caesar Electronics Inc. v. Andrews (2×)
9th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See Forro Precision, Inc. v. IBM, 745 F.2d 1283, 1286 (9th Cir.1984) (“Forro II”), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1130 , 105 S.Ct. 2664 , 86 L.Ed.2d 280 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" Dr. Donald J. Barry and Dr. Bert Hassler v. Blue Cross of California (2×)
9th Cir. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See Forro Precision, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corp., 673 F.2d 1045, 1058 (9th Cir.1982) (a thirty-five percent market share did not permit an inference of monopoly power), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1130 , 105 S.Ct. 2664 , 86 L.Ed.2d 280 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" Cunha v. Ward Foods, Inc.
9th Cir. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See id. (witnesses were permitted to testify even though they were not identified until after the trial commenced). 85 The Employees also argue that the court should not have excluded evidence of an opinion written by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation.
discussed Cited "see" Cunha v. Ward Foods, Inc.
9th Cir. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See id. (witnesses were permitted to testify even though they were not identified until after the trial commenced).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Forro Precision, Inc.
v.
International Business Machines Corp.
No. 84-1577.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 28, 1985.
471 U.S. 1130
Cited by 16 opinions  |  Published

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Justice Blackmun took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.