green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.2 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“in cases brought against the Postal Service, the Postmaster General is the only properly named defendant”
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1993
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Meyer v. Runyon
in cases brought against the postal service, the postmaster general is the only properly named defendant
cited
Cited "see"
In re Sharif
See Matter of Kerlinsky, 406 Mass. 67, 72-74 (1989), cert, denied, 498 U.S. 1027 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
In re Gross
See Matter of Kerlinsky, 406 Mass. 67 , 76 n.8 (1989), cert, denied, 498 U.S. 1027 (1991) (delay in disciplinary hearing “is a mitigating circumstance to be considered”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ward v. Alternative Health Delivery Systems, Inc.
See Teagardener v. Republic-Franklin Inc. Pension Plan, 909 F.2d 947, 952 (6th Cir.1990) (holding that assertions in the pleadings of ERISA beneficiary status is insufficient to confer standing), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1027 , 111 S.Ct. 678 , 112 L.Ed.2d 670 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
In re Stern
See Matter of Kerlinsky, 406 Mass. 67, 75 (1989), cert, denied, 498 U.S. 1027 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Berthiaume v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car
See Soto v. United States Postal Service, 905 F.2d 537 (1st Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1027 , 111 S.Ct. 679 , 112 L.Ed.2d 671 (1991), and Washington v. McComb Motel Co., 759 F.Supp. 329 (S.D.Miss.1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
Montalvo v. United States Postal Service
See Soto v. United States Postal Serv., 905 F.2d 537 (1st Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1027 , 111 S.Ct. 679 , 112 L.Ed.2d 671 (1991); Healy v. United States Postal Serv., 677 F.Supp. 1284, 1288-89 (E.D.N.Y.1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
Blong v. Secretary of the Army
See Soto v. U.S. Postal Service, 905 F.2d 537, 539 (1st Cir.1990) (explaining that the only proper defendant is the Postmaster General and the court should dismiss claims against all other defendants, including local supervisors), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1027 , 111 S.Ct. 679 , 112 L.Ed.2d 671 (1991); Hall, 695 F.2d at 180 (noting that there is no cause of action under § 2000e-16(c) against the SBA, its regional director, or its district director; instead, the Administrator of the SBA is the only proper defendant); Rys v. United States Postal Service, 702 F.Supp. 945, 947 (D.Mass.) (dismissing …
St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.
v.
Superior Court of California for the City and County of San Francisco (Jones, Real Parties in Interest)
v.
Superior Court of California for the City and County of San Francisco (Jones, Real Parties in Interest)
No. 90-710.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 7, 1991.
498 U.S. 1027
Published
Citer courts: D. Massachusetts (1)
Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.