green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
1.9 score
“he elements of a cause of action for in an independent action are not different from those elements in a rule 60(b)(3) motion, and ... the time limit on such a motion does not apply to an independent action.”
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1987
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited "but see"
Geo. P. Reintjes Co. v. Riley Stoker Corp.
he elements of a cause of action for in an independent action are not different from those elements in a rule 60(b)(3) motion, and ... the time limit on such a motion does not apply to an independent action.
cited
Cited "see"
Averbach v. Rival Manufacturing Co.
See 482 U.S. 915 , 107 S.Ct. 3187 , 96 L.Ed.2d 675 (1987) and 484 U.S. 822 , 108 S.Ct. 83 , 98 L.Ed.2d 45 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, American Iron and Steel Institute, American Mining Congress, Alabama Power Company, National Coal Association, Intervenors. American Mining Congress v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Administrator, American Iron and Steel Institute, Alabama Power Company, Natural Resources Defense Council, Intervenors. American Iron and Steel Institute v. Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Alabama Power Company, American Mining Congress, Natural Resources Defense Council, Intervenors. American Iron and Steel Institute v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Administrator, Alabama Power Company, American Mining Congress, Natural Resources Defense Council, Intervenors. American Iron and Steel Institute v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Alabama Power Company, Natural Resources Defense Council, Intervenors. American Mining Congress v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Alabama Power Company, National Coal Association, Natural Resources Defense Council, Intervenors
See, e.g., United States v. Ford Motor Co., 814 F.2d 1099, 1104 (6th Cir.) (noting that emission sources are "offered the opportunity to have significant input on the setting of emission limits," for example, in the state's promulgation of the state implementation plan and EPA's approval of it), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 822 , 108 S.Ct. 83 , 98 L.Ed.2d 45 (1987); see also United States v. Alcan Foil Products, 889 F.2d 1513, 1516 (6th Cir.1989) (company's proposed revision to Kentucky state implementation plan approved by air pollution control region), petition for cert. filed, 58 U.S.L.W. 3480 (U…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
See, e.g., United States v. Ford Motor Co., 814 F.2d 1099, 1104 (6th Cir.) (noting that emission sources are “offered the opportunity to have significant input on the setting of emission limits,” for example, in the state’s promulgation of the state implementation plan and EPA’s approval of it), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 822 , 108 S.Ct. 83 , 98 L.Ed.2d 45 (1987); see also United States v. Alcan Foil Products, 889 F.2d 1513, 1516 (6th Cir.1989) (company’s proposed revision to Kentucky state implementation plan approved by air pollution control region), petition for cert. filed, 58 U.S.L.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rosa
Compare United States v. Gibbs, 813 F.2d 596 (3d Cir.) (The ex post facto clause forbids "the imposition of a law which purports to make innocent acts criminal after their event, or to aggravate an offense by altering the amount of punishment imposed for its commission, after the fact, to the disadvantage of the accused."), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 822 , 108 S.Ct. 83 , 98 L.Ed.2d 45 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rosa
Compare United States v. Gibbs, 813 F.2d 596 (3d Cir.) (The ex post facto clause forbids “the imposition of a law which purports to make innocent acts criminal after their event, or to aggravate an offense by altering the amount of punishment imposed for its commission, after the fact, to the disadvantage of the accused.”), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 822 , 108 S.Ct. 83 , 98 L.Ed.2d 45 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Juan Carlos Ocampo and Luis Alfonso Escobar
See also United States v. Gibbs, 813 F.2d 596 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 822 , 108 S.Ct. 83 , 98 L.Ed.2d 45 (1987); United States v. Morgan, 835 F.2d 79, 81 (5th Cir.1987); United States v. McHugh, 769 F.2d 860, 868 (1st Cir.1985); United States v. Simmons, 725 F.2d 641 (11th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 827 , 105 S.Ct. 108 , 83 L.Ed.2d 52 (1984).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Torres
See, e.g., United States v. Gibbs, 813 F. 2d 596, 599-601 (3rd Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 822 , 108 S.Ct. 83 , 98 L.Ed. 2d 45 (1987); State v. Catlow, supra .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Randy BRAME
v.
UNITED STATES
v.
UNITED STATES
No. 86-1896.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 5, 1987.
Published
Citer courts: First Circuit (1)
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Denied.