green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 5×
13.0 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 37 distinct citers.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Ass'n v. Gonzales
(2×)
only the most extravagant delegations of authority, those providing no standards to constrain administrative discretion, have been condemned by the supreme court as unconstitutional.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Rucker
differing levels of culpability and proof are inevitable in any multi-defendant trial and standing alone are insufficient grounds for separate trials.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Angelo Ruggiero, Gene Gotti and John Carneglia
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
ruggiero ii
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Chesapeake Western Railway
csxt v. utu
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
National Federation of Federal Employees v. United States of America
(2×)
only the most extravagant delegations of authority, those providing no standards to constrain administrative discretion, have been condemned by the supreme court as unconstitutional.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Blue
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F2d 547, 557 (2d Cir 1988), cert den, 488 US 966 (1988) (explaining burden under identical language of FRE 1003).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Blue
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F2d 547, 557 (2d Cir 1988), cert den, 488 US 966 (1988) (explaining burden under identical language of FRE 1003).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Williams
United States v. Carraway, 108 F.3d 745, 751 (7th Cir.1997) (citing United States v. Gambino, 951 F.2d 498 , 501 (2d Cir.1991) (collecting cases), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 918 , 112 S.Ct. 1962 , 118 L.Ed.2d 563 (1992)). “[T]he weight of authority suggests that when the trial judge continues to poll the jury after one juror disagrees with the verdict, reversible error occurs only when it is apparent that the judge coerced the jurors into prematurely rendering a decision and not merely because the judge continued to poll the jury.” Gambino, 951 F.2d at 501; accord United States v. Fiorilla, 85…
discussed
Cited "see"
Baker v. Kirkpatrick
We have so held with respect to inconsistency between verdicts on separate charges against one defendant, Dunn v. United States, 284 U.S. 390, 393 , 52 S.Ct. 189 , 76 L.Ed. 356 (1932), and also with respect to verdicts that treat codefendants in a joint trial inconsistently, United States v. Dotterweich, 320 U.S. 277, 279 , 64 S.Ct. 134 , 88 L.Ed. 48 (1943).”); United States v. Acosta, 17 F.3d 538, 545 (2d Cir.1994) (“It has long been established that inconsistency in jury verdicts of guilty on some counts and not guilty on others is not a ground for reversal of the verdicts of guilty.”)…
discussed
Cited "see"
In re the Arbitration between Board of Education of Schenectady City School District
Given that “the rights and interests of the parties remain undetermined pending the outcome of this appeal,” the appeal is not moot (Kahn v Levy, 52 AD3d 928, 929 [2008]; see Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas for Locals 17, 135, 257 & 608 of United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., AFL-CIO, 72 NY2d 307, 311 [1988], cert denied 488 US 966 [1988]).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Alex Wong, Roger Kwok, Chen I. Chung, Tung Tran, Danny Ngo, Brian Chan, Joseph Wang, Chiang T. Cheng, and Steven Ng
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 553-54 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Atehortva, Alejandro Correa
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 554-56 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Leroy Johnson, Jr.
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 554 (2d Cir.) (“If any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, the conviction must be sustained.”) (collecting cases), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Perry Lee Herring v. Larry R. Meachum, Commissioner of Corrections
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 556 (2d Cir.) (defendants were not substantially prejudiced by joint trial where “the evidence with respect to each of the defendants was adequately straightforward that the jury could consider it without any significant spillover effect”), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988); Lotsch, 102 F.2d at 36 (defendant’s objection to joinder of offenses disappears when his “conduct on several separate occasions can properly be examined in detail”).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Gambino
(2×)
See United States v. Ruggiero, 846 F.2d 117, 118 (2d Cir.) (noting that "the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had received information from confidential sources that the defendants had identified members of the anonymous jury for the purpose of influencing the verdict ... [and] had employed William Sewell, a private investigator, to trace the license plates of suspected jurors"), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 491 , 102 L.Ed.2d 528 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert Garcia, Jane Lee Garcia and Ralph Vallone, Jr., Robert Garcia and Jane Lee Garcia
See United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57 , 105 S.Ct. 471 , 83 L.Ed.2d 461 (1984), United States v. Dotterweich, 320 U.S. 277, 279 , 64 S.Ct. 134,135 , 88 L.Ed. 48 (1943), Dunn v. United States, 284 U.S. 390, 393 , 52 S.Ct. 189, 190 , 76 L.Ed. 356 (1932), United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 559-60 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988).
cited
Cited "see"
Temple of the Lost Sheep Inc. v. Abrams
See Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas, 72 N.Y.2d 307, 312 , 532 N.Y.S.2d 722 , 528 N.E.2d 1195 , cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 492 , 102 L.Ed.2d 529 (1988).
cited
Cited "see"
Temple Of The Lost Sheep Inc. v. Abrams
See Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas, 72 N.Y.2d 307, 312 , 532 N.Y.S.2d 722 , 528 N.E.2d 1195 , cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 492 , 102 L.Ed.2d 529 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alex Simmons
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 554 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988); United States v. Teitler, 802 F.2d 606, 614 (2d Cir.1986). 62 Under this narrow standard of review, we find no reason to disturb the jury's finding that appellants participated in the murder and conspiracy to murder Bobby Walker.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Manuel Castillo and Juan Fernandez
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 553-54 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Simmons
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 554 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988); United States v. Teitler, 802 F.2d 606, 614 (2d Cir.1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Hector Gonzalez
See United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 555 (2d Cir.) (evidence sufficient to sustain conviction for drug trafficking since rational juror could conclude defendant’s statements indicated his participation in heroin conspiracy, not his desire to get involved in legal gambling operation as defendant claimed), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988).
cited
Cited "see"
Terrell McCoy Creekmore and Wife, Opal Young Creekmore v. United States of America, Otis Elevator Company, a Corporation
See Cole v. United States, 846 F.2d 1290 , 1294 n. 8 (11th Cir.1988), cert. den. 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 492 , 102 L.Ed.2d 529 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Cervone
Rather, there must have been prejudice so substantial as to amount to a “miscarriage of justice.” United States v. Nersesian, 824 F.2d 1294, 1303 (2d Cir.) (quoting United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1177 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985)), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 957 , 108 S.Ct. 355 , 98 L.Ed.2d 380 (1987); see United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 556 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Cervone
Rather, there must have been prejudice so substantial as to amount to a "miscarriage of justice." United States v. Nersesian, 824 F.2d 1294, 1303 (2d Cir.) (quoting United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1177 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985)), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 957 , 108 S.Ct. 355 , 98 L.Ed.2d 380 (1987); see United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 556 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988). 63 Appellants have not met this burden.
cited
Cited "see"
St. Agnes Hospital v. Bowen
See Sunshine Health Systems v. Bowen, 842 F.2d 1097 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 491 , 102 L.Ed.2d 528 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
National Restaurant Ass'n v. Commissioner of Labor
We consider at the outset whether the 2016 enactment by the Legislature of a gradual increase in the statutory minimum wage to $15 an hour — the rate of increase dependent upon factors such as the location of the employees, the size of the employer and the state of the economy — has rendered this appeal moot (see Labor Law § 652 [1], as amended by L 2016, ch 54, § 1, part K, § 1; see also Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas for Locals 17, 135, 257 & 608 of United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., AFL-CIO, 72 NY2d 307, 311 [1988], cert denied 488 US 966 [1988] [“mootness is a doctrine re…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
National Restaurant Ass'n v. Commissioner of Labor
We consider at the outset whether the 2016 enactment by the Legislature of a gradual increase in the statutory minimum wage to $15 an hour — the rate of increase dependent upon factors such as the location of the employees, the size of the employer and the state of the economy — has rendered this appeal moot (see Labor Law § 652 [1], as amended by L 2016, ch 54, § 1, part K, § 1; see also Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas for Locals 17, 135, 257 & 608 of United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., AFL-CIO, 72 NY2d 307, 311 [1988], cert denied 488 US 966 [1988] [“mootness is a doctrine re…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
E.W. Tompkins Co. v. Board of Trustees of Clifton Park-Halfmoon Public Library
Under such circumstances, this appeal is moot (see Matter of Paden v Planning Bd. of Town of Mamakating, 270 AD2d 626, 626 [2000]; Matter of Save the Pine Bush v Cuomo, 200 AD2d 859, 860 [1994], lv dismissed 83 NY2d 884 [1994]; Matter of Harbour v Riedell, 172 AD2d 920, 921 [1991]), which is an issue the Court can raise on its own motion (see Matter of Flowers v Sullivan, 75 NY2d 850, 850 [1990]; Gaetani v Grippen, 183 AD2d 989, 990 [1992]; see also Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas for Locals 17, 135, 257 & 608 of United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of Am., AFL-CIO, 72 NY2d 307, 311 [1988], cert…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. McCrimmon
However, like other courts, “[W]e do not accept the Brasfield per se rule, believing that the totality of the circumstances rule is more just and sensible.” Roberts, 131 Ariz. at 516 , 642 P.2d at 861 ; see also United States v. Fiorilla, 850 F.2d 172, 175-76 (3rd Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 492 (1988); Amos v. United States, 496 F.2d 1269, 1273 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974); United States v. Brooks, 420 F.2d 1350, 1354 (D.C.Cir.1969).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Skaggs v. Carle
(2×)
See also Humphrey v. Baker, 848 F.2d 211, 214-15 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 491 , 102 L.Ed.2d 528 (1988) (holding doctrine of equitable discretion to be “the law of our circuit”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bolinske v. North Dakota State Fair Ass'n
(2×)
Forsyth County, Ga. v. Nationalist Movement, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 2395 , 120 L.Ed.2d 101 (1992); see also State v. Anderson, 427 N.W.2d 316 (N.D.) (footnote 1), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 965 , 109 S.Ct. 491 , 102 L.Ed.2d 528 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Leach v. Resolution Trust Corp.
(2×)
See also Humphrey v. Baker, 848 F.2d 211, 214-215 (D.C.Cir.1988) (“Under the doctrine of equitable discretion, the availability of an internally available remedy to Members of Congress means that it would be an abuse of discretion for the judiciary to entertain the action.”), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 491 , 102 L.Edüd 528 (1988). 12 Finally, the Court also notes that the Plaintiffs challenge to the validity of the doctrine of remedial discretion is especially misplaced given his substantial reliance upon the cases of Murphy v. Department of the Army, 613 F.2d 1151 (D.C.Cir.19…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gambino
R.Crim.P. 14.” United States v. Gallo, 863 F.2d 185, 194 (2d Cir.1988) (citing United States v. Sliker, 751 F.2d 477, 492 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1058 , 105 S.Ct. 1772 , 84 L.Ed.2d 832 (1985)), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1083 , 109 S.Ct. 1539 , 103 L.Ed.2d 843 (1989); see also United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d at 1149 (“Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge.”) (citing United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 556 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Alfred L. Grant v. Robert Hoke and Robert Abrams, Attorney General of the State of New York
As a general rule in federal court, the decision whether to grant a severance is “committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge.” United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir.1989), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 110 S.Ct. 1138 , 2175, 2564, 107 L.Ed.2d 1043 (1990); see also United States v. Chang An-Lo, 851 F.2d 547, 556 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 966 , 109 S.Ct. 493 , 102 L.Ed.2d 530 (1988); United States v. Nersesian, 824 F.2d 1294, 1303 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 957 , 958, 1061, 108 S.Ct. 355 , 108 S.Ct. 357 , 108 S.Ct. 1018 , 98 L.Ed.2d 380 , 98 L.Ed.2d 9…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Doe
(Matter of Beach v Shanley, 62 NY2d 241, 248-249 [1984], supra; see also, Matter of Grand Jury Subpoenas for Locals 17, 135, 257 & 608, 72 NY2d 307 [1988], cert denied 488 US 966 .) The court must balance the competing interests of recognizing the qualified news reporter’s privilege under appropriate circumstances against the government’s interest in an unimpeded Grand Jury investigation of legitimate subjects of inquiry.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Claddis Arrington, Brooks Gregory Davis, Mary Ferguson Davis, and Wayne Davis
The trial judge’s evaluation is entitled to “the highest degree of respect.” Washington, 434 U.S. at 511 , 98 S.Ct at *126 833; see also United States v. Ruggiero, 846 F.2d 117, 123 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 491 , 102 L.Ed.2d 528 (1988); United States v. Mastrangelo, 662 F.2d 946, 950 (2d Cir.1981), ce rt. denied, 456 U.S. 973 , 102 S.Ct. 2236 , 72 L.Ed.2d 847 (1982).
Boston
v.
Nelson
v.
Nelson
No. 88-380.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 28, 1988.
Int. Ct. App. Haw. Certiorari denied.