green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.4 score
“he exception in 14501(c)(2)(a) limits the authority of a state to delegate its regulatory authority over tow truck operators to local or municipal governments.”
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1999
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Martin v. Stites
he exception in 14501(c)(2)(a) limits the authority of a state to delegate its regulatory authority over tow truck operators to local or municipal governments.
discussed
Cited "see"
Brown v. New York State Department of Correctional Services
See E.E.O.C. v. PVNF, L.L.C., 487 F.3d 790, 799 (10th Cir.2007) (“the very term ‘environment’ indicates that allegedly discriminatory incidents should not be examined in isolation”) (quoting Penry v. Federal Home Loan Bank of Topeka, 155 F.3d 1257, 1262 (10th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1039 , 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 498 (1999)); Mason v. Southern Illinois Univ. at Carbondale, 233 F.3d 1036, 1045 (7th Cir.2000) (“Courts should not carve up the incidents of harassment and then separately analyze each incident, by itself, to see if each rises to the level of being severe or …
discussed
Cited "see"
Brown v. NEW YORK STATE DEPT. OF CORREC. SERVICES
See E.E.O.C. v. PVNF, L.L.C., 487 F.3d 790, 799 (10th Cir.2007) ("the very term `environment' indicates that allegedly discriminatory incidents should not be examined in isolation") (quoting Penry v. Federal Home Loan Bank of Topeka, 155 F.3d 1257, 1262 (10th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1039 , 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 498 (1999)); Mason v. Southern Illinois Univ. at Carbondale, 233 F.3d 1036, 1045 (7th Cir.2000) ("Courts should not carve up the incidents of harassment and then separately analyze each incident, by itself, to see if each rises to the level of being severe or pervasive"…
discussed
Cited "see"
Doe v. Tangipahoa Parish School Bd.
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Id. at 400-02; see id. at 399 ("[W]e have read Marsh as hinging on the nonsectarian nature of the invocations at issue there".). 55 The Tenth Circuit in Snyder v. Murray City Corp., 159 F.3d 1227 (10th Cir.1998) (en banc), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1039 , 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 499 (1999), applied Marsh in denying a speaker's request to present an invocation at a city-council meeting because of its disparaging, proselytizing content.
discussed
Cited "see"
Bearint Ex Rel. Bearint v. Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc.
See Klonoski v. Mahlah, 156 F.3d 255, 270, 274-76 (1st Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1039 , 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 498 (1999) (describing the difference between impeachment and substantive testimony and reiterating that only evidence used solely for impeachment is exempt from the Federal Rules’ disclosure requirement).
cited
Cited "see"
Snyder v. Murray City Corp.
See Snyder v. Murray City Corp., 159 F.3d 1227 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1039 , 119 S.Ct. 1334 (1998). 3 .
cited
Cited "see"
Todd v. Bear Valley Village Apartments
See Klonoski v. Mahlab, 156 F.3d 255, 269 (1st Cir.1998), cert. denied sub nom., Mary Hitchcock Mem’l Hosp. v. Klonoski, — U.S. -, 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 498 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Doe ex rel. Doe v. Tangipahoa Parish School Board
Id. at 794-95 , 103 S.Ct. 3330 ; see also, e.g., Snyder v. Murray City Corp., 159 F.3d 1227, 1235 (10th Cir.1998) (en banc) (applying Marsh to uphold city council’s decision to disallow a particular opening prayer proselytizing its religious views while disparaging others), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1039 , 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 499 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Costa v. AFGO Mechanical Services, Inc.
While the taped conversations can possibly be used for impeachment purposes, they are also clearly “substantive evidence” in that they may be used “to establish the truth of a matter to be determined by the trier of fact.” Chiasson v. Zapata Gulf Marine Corp., 988 F.2d 513, 517 (5th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1029 , 114 S.Ct. 1536 , 128 L.Ed.2d 189 (1994); see also Klonoski v. Mahlab, 156 F.3d 255, 270 (1st Cir.1998) (adopting standard set forth in Chiasson v. Zapata Gulf Marine Corp.), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1039 , 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 498 (1999); Lomascolo v. Otto Olds…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Searcy v. Simmons
See, e.g., Snyder v. Murray City *1061 Corp, 124 F.3d 1349, 1352 (10th Cir.1997) (to state valid free exercise claim, plaintiff must exercise or protect sincerely held religious belief), vacated on other grounds, 159 F.3d 1227 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1039 , 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 499 (1999).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. City of Yonkers
See, e.g., Century Marine Inc. v. United States, 153 F.3d 225, 231 (5th Cir.1998), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 499 (1999); Sierra Fria Corp. v. Donald J.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. CITY OF YONKERS YONKERS BOARD OF EDUCATION
See, e.g., Century Marine Inc. v. United States, 153 F.3d 225, 231 (5th Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 1334 (1999); Sierra Fria Corp. v. Donald J.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hawkins v. City And County Of Denver
Quintessential traditional public fora are streets, sidewalks, and parks, for they "have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for the purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions." Id. (quoting Hague v. CIO, 307 U.S. 496, 515 , 59 S.Ct. 954 , 83 L.Ed. 1423 (1939)); see also, e.g., Snyder v. Murray City Corp., 159 F.3d 1227, 1244 (10th Cir.1998) (en banc), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 119 S.Ct. 1334 , 143 L.Ed.2d 499 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hawkins v. City & County of Denver
Quintessential traditional public fora are streets, sidewalks, and parks, for they “have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for the purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions.” Id. (quoting Hague v. CIO, 307 U.S. 496, 515 , 59 S.Ct. 954 , 83 L.Ed. 1423 (1939)); see also, e.g., Snyder v. Murray City Corp., 159 F.3d 1227, 1244 (10th Cir.1998) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 119 S.Ct. 1334 , - L.Ed.2d - (1999).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cox
v.
Utah Labor Commission
v.
Utah Labor Commission
No. 98-1198.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 29, 1999.
Published
Citer courts: Tenth Circuit (1)
Ct. App. Utah. Certiorari denied.