green
Positive treatment
3.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth, Department of General Services v. Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 85
See In Interest of F.B., 442 Pa.Super. 216 , 658 A.2d 1378 (1995), aff'd, 555 Pa. 661 , 726 A.2d 361 (1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1060 , 120 S.Ct. 613 , 145 L.Ed.2d 508 (1999); Commonwealth v. Vecchione, 327 Pa.Super. 548 , 476 A.2d 403 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ginest v. Board of County Commissioners
See Loyd v. Alabama Dep’t of Corrections, 176 F.3d 1336, 1342 (11th Cir.) (reversing the district court’s refusal to hold an evidentiary hearing pri- or to terminating the consent decree, reasoning that “[i]t would read all meaning out of [§ 3626(b)(3) ] to force the party opposing termination to show that the consent decree meets the requirements of § 3626(b)(3) and then not provide that party with the opportunity to present evidence on that point”), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1061 , 120 S.Ct. 613 , 145 L.Ed.2d 509 (1999); Berwanger, 178 F.3d at 839-40 (holding that the district court e…
discussed
Cited "see"
Ginest v. BOARD OF CTY. COM'RS OF CARBON CTY., WY
See Loyd v. Alabama Dep't of Corrections, 176 F.3d 1336, 1342 (11th Cir.) (reversing the district court's refusal to hold an evidentiary hearing prior to terminating the consent decree, reasoning that "[i]t would read all meaning out of [§ 3626(b)(3) ] to force the party opposing termination to show that the consent decree meets the requirements of § 3626(b)(3) and then not provide that party with the opportunity to present evidence on that point"), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1061 , 120 S.Ct. 613 , 145 L.Ed.2d 509 (1999); Berwanger, 178 F.3d at 839-40 (holding that the district court erred by le…
cited
Cited "see"
Warrington Township v. Powell
See In the Interest of F.B., 442 Pa.Super. 216 , 658 A.2d 1378 (1995), affd, 555 Pa. 661 , 726 A.2d 361 , cert, denied, F.B. v. Pennsylvania, 528 U.S. 1060 , 120 S.Ct. 613 , 145 L.Ed.2d 508 (1999). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Everett Hadix, Plaintiffs-Appellees/cross-Appellants v. Perry M. Johnson,defendants-Appellants/cross-Appellees
See Loyd v. Alabama Dep’t of Corrections, 176 F.3d 1336, 1342 (11th Cir.) (reversing the district court’s refusal to hold an evidentiary hearing pri- or to terminating the consent decree, reasoning that “[i]t would read all meaning out of [§ 3626(b)(3) ] to force the party opposing termination to show that the consent decree meets the requirements of § 3626(b)(3) and then not provide that party with the opportunity to present evidence on that point”), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 120 S.Ct. 613 , 145 L.Ed.2d 509 (1999); Berwanger, 178 F.3d at 839-40 (holding that the district court err…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jessie Lee Waldon
See Carter v. United States, - U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 613 , 145 L.Ed.2d 508 (1999) (granting a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which concluded that bank larceny, 18 U.S.C. 2113(b), is not a lesser-included offense of bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. 2113(a)). 3 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
F. B.
v.
Pennsylvania
v.
Pennsylvania
No. 98-9676.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 13, 1999.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Sup. Ct. Pa. Certio-rari denied.