green
Positive treatment
3.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re American Continental Corporation/lincoln Savings & Loan Securities Litigation. Lexecon Inc. Daniel R. Fischel v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, a Partnership Patrick Coughlin William S. Lerach Kevin P. Roddy Leonard B. Simon Melvyn I. Weiss Patricia Hynes Michael C. Spencer Stephen R. Steinberg, in Re American Continental Corporation/lincoln Savings & Loan Securities Litigation. Lexecon Inc. Daniel R. Fischel v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, a Partnership Patrick Coughlin William S. Lerach Kevin P. Roddy Leonard B. Simon Melvyn I. Weiss Patricia Hynes Michael C. Spencer Stephen R. Steinberg, Cotchett, Illston & Pitre Joseph Cotchett Susan Illston, in Re American Continental Corporation/lincoln Savings & Loan Securities Litigation. Lexecon Inc. Daniel R. Fischel v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, a Partnership Patrick Coughlin William S. Lerach Kevin P. Roddy Leonard B. Simon Melvyn I. Weiss Patricia Hynes Michael C. Spencer Stephen R. Steinberg
See Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n. 1 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 418 , 133 L.Ed.2d 336 (1995); Henson v. CSC Credit Serv., 29 F.3d 280, 284 (7th Cir.1994); United States ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see"
Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach
See Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n. 1 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 418 , 133 L.Ed.2d 336 (1995); Henson v. CSC Credit Serv., 29 F.3d 280, 284 (7th Cir.1994); United States ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see"
1996-1 Trade Cases P 71,383, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2946, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4883 Metro Industries, Inc. v. Sammi Corporation, Sammi (America) Corporation Ken Carter Industries, Inc.
See Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128, 1131 (9th Cir.) ("The doctrine of issue preclusion, of course, cannot be applied against a litigant who was not a party to or in privity with a party to the prior proceeding."), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 418 , 133 L.Ed.2d 336 (1995). 6 However, because the facts of this case are identical to and indistinguishable from the facts of Vollrath, we follow Vollrath and conclude that Metro has not presented sufficient evidence from which a rational finder of fact could conclude that Sammi had market power in a relevant market.
discussed
Cited "see"
Metro Industries, Inc. v. Sammi Corp.
See Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128, 1131 (9th Cir.) (“The doctrine of issue preclusion, of course, cannot be applied against a litigant who was not a party to or in privity with a party to the prior proceeding.”), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 116 S.Ct. 418 , 133 L.Ed.2d 336 (1995). 6 However, becáuse the facts of this case are identical to and indistinguishable from the facts of Vollrath, we follow Vollrath and conclude that Metro has not presented sufficient evidence from which a rational finder of fact could conclude that Sammi had market power in a relevant market.
discussed
Cited "see"
Steele v. California Dept. of Social Services
See Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n. 1 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 418 (1995) 2 Because Steele filed her federal complaint within one year of when the claims arose, the applicable statute of limitations does not bar the claims.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Trevino v. Gates
Although Trevino was not a party in Gomez , a “person technically not a party to the prior action may be bound by the prior decision if his interests are so similar to a party’s that that party was his virtual representative in the prior action.” United States v. Geophysical Corporation of Alaska, 732 F.2d 693, 697 (9th Cir.1984) (internal quotations omitted); see also Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128, 1131 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 418 , 133 L.Ed.2d 336 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
45 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1143, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8007, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 13,300 Johanna Trevino v. Daryl Gates Tom Bradley Tom Reddin Roger Murdock Ed Davis Herbert Boeckmann James Fisk Stephen Gavin Maxwell Greenberg Elbert Hudson Marguerite Justice Emmett McGaughey Salvador Montenegro Barbara Schlei Robert Talcott Reva Tooley Robert Weil Samuel Williams Stephen Yslas Lapd Officers Jerry Brooks Joseph Callian Warren Sirk Richard Spellman Gary Strickland James Tippings Richard Zierenberg Manuel Avila Charles Bennett Brian Davis John Fruge Joseph Freia E.T. Guiza Peter Sanchez Reginald Weaver James Toma C.S. Winston Philip Wixon Gary Zerbey Joel Wachs Joy Picus John Ferraro Zev Yaroslavsky Ruth Galanter Ernani Bernardi Nate Holden Marvin Braude Hal Bernson Michael Woo Joan Flores One Hundred Unknown Named Employees or Officials of the City of Los Angeles, All in Both Their Individual and Official Capacities City of Los Angeles, Johanna Trevino v. Daryl F. Gates, Chief of Police Tom Bradley Tom Reddin Roger Murdock Ed Davis Herbert Boeckmann James Fisk Stephen Gavin Maxwell Greenberg Elbert Hudson Marguerite Justice Emmett McGaughey Salvador Montenegro Barbara L. Schlei Robert Talcott Reva B. Tooley Robert Weil Samuel L. Williams Stephen D. Yslas Jerry Brooks Joseph Callian Warren Eggar David B. Harrison John Helms Michael Sirk Richard Spellman Gary Strickland James Tippings Richard Zierenberg Manuel Avila Charles Bennett Brian Davis John Fruge Joseph Freia E.T. Guiza Peter Sanchez Reginald Weaver James Toma C.S. Winston Philip Wixon Gary Zerbey Joel Wachs Joy Picus John Ferraro Zev Yaroslavsky Ruth Galanter Ernani Bernardi Nate Holden Marvin Braude Hal Bernson Michael Woo Joan Milke Flores One Hundred Unknown Named Employees/officials of the City of Los Angeles, All in Both Their Individual and Official Capacities City of Los Angeles
Although Trevino was not a party in Gomez, a "person technically not a party to the prior action may be bound by the prior decision if his interests are so similar to a party's that that party was his virtual representative in the prior action." United States v. Geophysical Corporation of Alaska, 732 F.2d 693, 697 (9th Cir.1984) (internal quotations omitted); see also Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128, 1131 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 418 , 133 L.Ed.2d 336 (1995).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Prometheus Funding Corp., fka Frank B. Hall & Co., Inc.
v.
Merchants Home Delivery Services, Inc.
v.
Merchants Home Delivery Services, Inc.
No. 95-409.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 6, 1995.
Cited by 6 opinions | Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.