green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 4×
9.9 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“Unisys /”
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Arctic King Fisheries, Inc. v. United States
in analyzing a takings claim, a court must first determine what was taken
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth Edison Co. v. United States
he principles of takings law that apply to real property do not apply in the same manner to statutes imposing monetary liability.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
22 Employee Benefits Cas. 2945, Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23952e
(2×)
unisys i
discussed
Cited "see"
Laplace v. Demarco, No. Cv 01-0095009 S (Oct. 16, 2002)
See DeMarco's memorandum of law, pp. 14-15. "[W]hen the nonmoving party will bear the burden of proof at trial, the moving party may meet its burden by showing that the nonmoving party has not offered evidence sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to its case." In re Unisys Savings Plan Litigation , 74 F.3d 420 , 433 (3d Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 810 , 117 S.Ct. 56 , 136 L.Ed.2d 19 (1996). "[R]ecovery for unintentionally-caused emotional distress does not depend on proof of either an ensuing physical injury or a risk of harm from physical impact. . . . [R]ather…
discussed
Cited "see"
Provost v. City of Newburgh
See United States v. Masotto, 73 F.3d 1233, 1238 (2d Cir.) (“An erroneous instruction requires a new trial unless the error is harmless.”), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 810 , 117 S.Ct. 54 , 136 L.Ed.2d 18 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
Provost v. The City Of Newburgh
See United States v. Masotto, 73 F.3d 1233, 1238 (2d Cir.) ("An erroneous instruction requires a new trial unless the error is harmless."), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 810 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
First Hartford Corp. Pension Plan & Trust v. United States
See Branch v. United States, 69 F.3d 1571, 1575 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 810 , 117 S.Ct. 55 , 136 L.Ed.2d 18 (1996) (declaring that “[t]his court [Federal Circuit] has not had occasion to address the question whether the Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction over shareholder derivative actions, and we do not find it necessary to resolve that question in this case.”); see also California Hous.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Petro-Hunt, L.L.C. v. United States
Cos., Inc. v. United States, 583 F.3d 849, 856-57 (Fed.Cir.2009); see also Branch v. United States, 69 F.3d 1571, 1575 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 810 , 117 S.Ct. 55 , 136 L.Ed.2d 18 (1996) ("In analyzing a takings claim, a court must first determine what was taken.”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rose
See Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640, 646-48 , 66 S.Ct. 1180 , 90 L.Ed. 1489 (1946); see also United States v. Masotto, 73 F.3d 1233, 1240 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 810 , 117 S.Ct. 54 , 136 L.Ed.2d 18 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Demetric Wade
See, e.g., United States v. Ramos, 147 F.3d 281, 286-87 (3d Cir.1998) (finding foreseeabiity when evidence showed that defendant himself had carried a gun in previQus drug transactions); United States v. Fonseca-Caro, 114 F.3d 906, 908 (9th Cir.1997) (same), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1097 , 118 S.Ct. 895 , 139 L.Ed.2d 880 (1998); United States v. Friend, 50 F.3d 548, 553-54 (8th Cir.1995) (finding foreseeabiity when evidence showed defendant's close relationship t9 the coconspirator and the defendant's discussions of his long-time involvement in the drug business), cert. granted and judgment vac.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Burleson v. Saffle
See, e.g., Trim v. State, 1996 OK CR 1 , 909 P.2d 841, 843 , cert. denied, 519 U.S. 810 , 117 S.Ct. 54 , 136 L.Ed.2d 17 (1996) (multiple convictions were error where defendant sold three obscene magazines at one time); Hunnicutt v. State, 1988 OK CR 91 , 755 P.2d 105, 110-111 (two convictions for stolen property in error where defendant bought one sack containing two stolen pistols); Watkins v. State, 1992 OK CR 34 , 855 P.2d 141, 142 (two convictions for possession of controlled substances with intent to distribute were error where two types of drugs were shipped in single package). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Truck Renting & Leasing Ass'n v. Commissioner of Revenue
See also Couchot v. State Lottery Comm’n, 74 Ohio St. 3d 417, 424-425 , cert, denied, 519 U.S. 810 (1996); Geoffrey, Inc. v. South Carolina Tax Comm’n, 313 S.C. 15 , 23 n.4, cert, denied, 510 U.S. 992 (1993); Borden Chems. & Plastics v. Zehnder, 312 Ill.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Walcek v. United States
See also Branch v. United States, 69 F.3d 1571, 1579 (Fed.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 810 , 117 S.Ct. 55 , 136 L.Ed.2d 18 (1996); American Cont’l Corp. v. United States, 22 Cl.Ct. 692, 697 (1991).
Nesson
v.
McIntyre
v.
McIntyre
No. 95-1785.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 1996.
Published
Citer courts: Third Circuit (3) · Federal Claims (2)
App. Ct. Ill., 2d Dist. Certiorari denied.