green
Positive treatment
4.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1921 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1921
1973
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Phoenix Petroleum Co.
See generally Moore v. Valder, 65 F.3d 189 , 195 n. 9 (D.C.Cir.1995), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 820 , 117 S.Ct. 75 , 136 L.Ed.2d 35 (1996). 5 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Korshin v. Benedictine Hospital
“Regardless of any substantive violation of the Sherman Act, ... plaintiffs [are still required] to establish that the defendants engaged in anticompetitive conduct that caused them an antitrust injury.” Id.; see Levine v. Central Florida Medical Affiliates, Inc., 864 F.Supp. 1175 (M.D.Fla.1994), aff'd, 72 F.3d 1538 (11th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 820 , 117 S.Ct. 75 , 136 L.Ed.2d 34 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jean v. Collins
See Moore v. Valder, 65 F.3d 189, 194 (D.C.Cir.1995), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 75 , 136 L.Ed.2d 35 (1996); Reid v. New Hampshire, 56 F.3d 332, 336 (1st Cir.1995) ("under Imbler it is now [a] well-settled rule that a prosecutor cannot be held personally liable for the knowing suppression of exculpatory information" (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); Hill, 45 F.3d at 661-62 ; Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1446 (8th Cir.1987). 16 To the extent, therefore, that Jean contends that Collins and Shingleton failed to disclose exculpatory evidence directly to the defense, …
discussed
Cited "see"
Jean v. Collins
See Moore v. Valder, 65 F.3d 189, 194 (D.C.Cir.1995), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 75 , 136 L.Ed.2d 35 (1996); Reid v. New Hampshire, 56 F.3d 332, 336 (1st Cir.1995) (“under Imbler it is now [a] well-settled rule that a prosecutor cannot be held personally hable for the knowing suppression of exculpatory information” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); Hill, 45 F.3d at 661-62 ; Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1446 (8th Cir.1987).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert P. Crow Dog
See United States v. Packer, 70 F.3d 357, 360 (5th Cir.1995) (interpreting the statute’s intent), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 75 , 136 L.Ed.2d 34 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert Crow Dog
See United States v. Packer, 70 F.3d 357, 360 (5th Cir. 1995) (interpreting the statute’s intent), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 75 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Highland Financial Corp.
See Moore v. Valder, 65 F.3d 189 , 195 n. 9 (D.C.Cir.1995), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 75 , 136 L.Ed.2d 35 (1996). 4 .
cited
Cited "see"
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. EDUARDO BARRAZA-PEREZ
See United States v. Packer, 70 F.3d 357, 360 (5th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 75 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rene Izaguirre
Compare United States v. Agoro, 996 F.2d 1288 (1st Cir. 1993) (grouping rules apply), and United States v. Flores, No. 93-3771, 1994 WL 163766 (6th Cir. May 2, 1994) (unpublished) (same), with United States v. Packer, 70 F.3d 357 (5th Cir. 1995) (grouping rules defeat statutory purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 3146 ), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 75 (1996).”). 9 Id. at 11; see also id. at 11-12 (asserting that the amendment “explains how the guideline provisions work together to ensure an incremental, consecutive penalty for the failure to appear count,” and “the amendment . . . states that the me…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Nobile
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 95-2004.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 1996.
Published
C. A. 3d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.