green
Positive treatment
5.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
Camacho Ortiz v. Municipio de San Juan
Dynamics Corp., 144 F.3d 151, 168 (1st Cir. 1998) (holding that the third criterion for determining whether an employment action contravenes a public employee's right to freedom of speech, namely the causation or motivation element, normally presents a factfinding responsibility for the jury) Additionally, several circuits have held that “the absence of speech—in fact, its explicit disclaimer by plaintiff—is fatal to the plaintiff’s claim.” Fogarty v. Boles, 121 F.3d 886, 891 (3rd Cir. 1997); see Wasson v. Sonoma County Junior Coll., 203 F.3d 659 (9th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.…
examined
Cited "see"
Camacho Ortiz v. Municipio de San Juan
(3×)
In turn, as pointed out by several circuits, “the absence of speech—in fact, its explicit disclaimer by plaintiff—is fatal to the plaintiff’s claim.” Fogarty v. Boles, 121 F.3d 886, 891 (3rd Cir. 1997); see Wasson v. Sonoma County Junior Coll., 203 F.3d 659 (9th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 927 , 148 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Terry L. Ambrose v. Township of Robinson, Pennsylvania
See Wasson v. Sonoma County Junior Coll., 203 F.3d 659 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 927 , 121 S.Ct. 305 , 148 L.Ed.2d 245 (2000); Jones v. Collins, 132 F.3d 1048, 1054 (5th Cir.1998); Barkoo v. Melby, 901 F.2d 613 (7th Cir.1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ambrose v. Robinson
See Wasson v. Sonoma County Junior Coll., 203 F.3d 659 (9th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 927 (2000); Jones v. Collins, 132 F.3d 1048, 1054 (5th Cir. 1998); Barkoo v. Melby, 901 F.2d 613 (7th Cir. 1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
Healthpoint, Ltd. v. Stratus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
See Balance Dynamics Corp. v. Schmitt Indus., Inc., 204 F.3d 683, 695 (6th Cir.2000)(affirming district court's finding that plaintiff "was only entitled to [defendant's profits] if it could show that defendant gained additional sales due to the advertisement, or that plaintiff lost sales, or was forced to [sell] its product a lower price”), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 927 , 121 S.Ct. 306 , 148 L.Ed.2d 245 (2000). 208 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Astoria Industries of Iowa, Inc. v. SNF, Inc.
See Logan, 263 F.3d at 462 ; see also Balance Dynamics Corp. v. Schmitt Indus., Inc., 204 F.3d 683, 689 (6th Cir.) (noting impor *632 tance of “clearly distinguishing the elements necessary to prove a breach of the Lanham Act from the elements necessary to justify a certain remedy for that breach”), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 927 , 121 S.Ct. 306 , 148 L.Ed.2d 245 (2000). 47 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Astoria Industries of Iowa, Inc. v. SNF Inc. D/B/A Brand FX Body Company
Group, 111 S.W.3d at 175; Diaz v. Rankin, 777 S.W.2d 496, 499-500 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1989, no writ) (both holding that evidence that one person reasonably recognized the alleged defamatory statement as referring to the plaintiff was sufficient to defeat summary judgment). 45: We address Astoria’s objections to Finley’s affidavit in section VI. 46: See Logan , 263 F.3d at 462 ; see also Balance Dynamics Corp. v. Schmitt Indus., Inc., 204 F.3d 683, 689 (6th Cir.) (noting importance of “clearly distinguishing the elements necessary to prove a breach of the Lanham Act from the eleme…
Chemical & Allied Product Workers Union, Local 20, AFL-CIO
v.
Jays Foods, L. L. C.
v.
Jays Foods, L. L. C.
No. 00-168.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 10, 2000.
Published
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.