green
Positive treatment
5.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Dye v. Communications Ventures III, LP (In re Flashcom, Inc.)
See In re DeVille, 361 F.3d 539, 547 (9th Cir.2004) (discussing review of a bankruptcy court’s sanctions award, noting that “[t]his court reviews an award of sanctions for an abuse of discretion”); Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 405 , 110 S.Ct. 2447, 2461 , 110 L.Ed.2d 359 (1990) (“An appellate court should apply an abuse-of-discretion standard in reviewing all aspects of a district court’s Rule 11 determination.”), superseded by statute, in part, on other grounds. “[PJrecedents interpreting [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 11 may prove a helpful guide to our int…
discussed
Cited "see"
Joseph v. Linehaul Logistics, Inc.
See In re Grantham Brothers, 922 F.2d 1438 , 1442 (9th Cir.1991) (collateral attack with no basis in law or fact is frivolous under Rule 11), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 826 , 112 S.Ct. 94 , 116 L.Ed.2d 66 (1991); Roberts v. Chevron, 117 F.R.D. 581 (M.D.La.1987) (bringing state court action attacking prior federal judgment and failing to dismiss after removal justified Rule 11 sanctions; reasonable inquiry would have shown that res judicata barred action), aff 'd, 857 F.2d 1471 (5th Cir.1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Waller v. Kriss (In Re Kriss)
See Valley National Bank v. Needler (In re Grantham Bros.), 922 F.2d 1438, 1441 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 826 , 112 S.Ct. 94 , 116 L.Ed.2d 66 (1991); Townsend v. Holman Consulting Corp., 929 F.2d 1358, 1362 (9th Cir.1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jack B. Buster, A. Lee Petersen v. Ronald E. Greisen Henry P. Head and David L. Ratchye
See In re Grantham Brothers, 922 F.2d 1438 , 1442 (9th Cir.1991) (collateral attack with no basis in law or fact is frivolous under Rule 11), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 826 , 112 S.Ct. 94 , 116 L.Ed.2d 66 (1991); Roberts v. Chevron, 117 F.R.D. 581 (M.D.La.1987) (bringing state court action attacking prior federal judgment and failing to dismiss after removal justified Rule 11 sanctions; reasonable inquiry would have shown that res judicata barred action), aff'd, 857 F.2d 1471 (5th Cir.1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Huisman
United States v. Agofsky, 20 F.3d 866, 873 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 280 , 130 L.Ed.2d 196 , cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 363 , 130 L.Ed.2d 316 (1994); see United States v. Kordosky, 921 F.2d 722, 723-24 (7th Cir.) (preexisting, unwritten policy requiring inventory search on every ear seized for forfeiture is sufficient), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 826 , 112 S.Ct. 94 , 116 L.Ed.2d 66 (1991); United States v. Frank, 864 F.2d 992, 1003 (3d Cir.1988) (finding sufficient a preexisting, unwritten policy for inventory on vehicles seized for forfeiture), cert. denied, 490 U.S…
discussed
Cited "see"
Jean Hsu Kenneth Hsu Terabyte International, Inc. v. Intel Corporation Thomas R. Lavelle, Terabyte International, Inc. Jean Hsu Kenneth Hsu R. Joseph Trojan v. Intel Corporation Thomas R. Lavelle Irving Rappaport, Jean Hsu Terabyte International, Inc. Kenneth Hsu v. Intel Corporation Thomas R. Lavelle
See In re Grantham Bros., 922 F.2d 1438 , 1442 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 94 , 116 L.Ed.2d 66 (1991); Huettig & Schromm, Inc. v. Landscape Contractors Council, 790 F.2d 1421, 1427 (9th Cir.1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Keith R. Hayes
See United States v. Hensley, 469 U.S. 221, 230-231 (1985) 3 The present case is distinguishable from United States v. Kordosky, 921 F.2d 722 (7th Cir.), aff'g 878 F.2d 991 (7th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 94 (1991), where the defendant was arrested for driving on a suspended license.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re W & S Investments, Inc., Debtors. Northmount Associates J. Dimmitt Smith, Apellants v. W & S Investments, Inc. Debtor-Appellant
See Valley Nat'l Bank v. Needler (In re Grantham Bros.), 922 F.2d 1438 , 1441 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 94 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Seke v. Commonwealth
See Code § 54.1-3415 (authorizing a permitted manufacturer or wholesaler to distribute Schedule II drugs, including cocaine, to specified individuals pursuant to an “official written order”); see also State v. Dunn, 166 Ariz. 506 , 803 P.2d 917, 920 (App.1990), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 827 , 112 S.Ct. 94 , 116 L.Ed.2d 66 (1991) (holding that a state law prohibiting the importation of narcotics does not violate the Commerce Clause); Guam v. Salas, No. 82-0061A, 1983 WL 29951 , at *5 (D.Guam App.Div.1983) (same).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Juan H. Lomeli
Wells, 495 U.S. at 4 , 110 S.Ct. at 1635 ; see also United States v. Kordosky, 921 F.2d 722, 724 (7th Cir.1991), certiorari denied, 502 U.S. 826 , 112 S.Ct. 94 , 116 L.Ed.2d 66 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Dwayne C. Lowe
See also United States v. Kordosky, 921 F.2d 722, 723-24 (7th Cir.) (although no written inventory policy, testimony regarding standard practice sufficient, including testimony that practice included “the opening of any locked or unlocked containers found within the vehicle in order to list their contents”), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 112 S.Ct. 94 , 116 L.Ed.2d 66 (1991).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
William L. NEEDLER
v.
VALLEY NATIONAL BANK OF ARIZONA
v.
VALLEY NATIONAL BANK OF ARIZONA
No. 90-7740.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 1991.
112 S. Ct. 94
Cited by 4 opinions | Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Denied.