green
Positive treatment
Trending · 97 recent citers
Quoted verbatim 1×
10.9 score
“congress may preempt state and local governments from regulating the operation and construction ... of personal wireless communications facilities.”
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "but see"
Shapiro v. Logistec USA Inc.
But see Borneman v. United States, 213 F.3d 819, 826 (4th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1070 , 121 S.Ct. 759 , 148 L.Ed.2d 661 (2001).
cited
Cited "but see"
Shapiro v. Logistec Usa Inc.
But see Borneman v. United States, 213 F.3d 819, 826 (4th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1070 , 121 S.Ct. 759 , 148 L.Ed.2d 661 (2001).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Santa Fe Alliance for Public Health and Safety v. City of Santa Fe
congress may preempt state and local governments from regulating the operation and construction ... of personal wireless communications facilities.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Fund for Animals v. Kempthorne
Ins. 19 Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 (1983) (internal quotation marks and 20 citation omitted). 21 The agency's action should only be set aside 22 [if] it 'relied on factors which Congress has 23 not intended it to consider, entirely failed 24 to consider an important aspect of the 25 problem, offered an explanation for its 26 decision that runs counter to the evidence 27 before the agency, or is so implausible that 28 it could not be ascribed to a difference in 29 view or the products of expertise.' 16 1 Cellular Phone Taskforce v. FCC, 205 F.3d 82 , 90 (2d Cir. 2000) 2 (quoting State Farm, 463 U.S. …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Fund for Animals v. Kempthorne
Ins. 17 Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 (1983) (citation and internal quotation 18 marks omitted). 19 The agency's action should only be set aside 20 [if] it 'relied on factors which Congress has 21 not intended it to consider, entirely failed 22 to consider an important aspect of the 23 problem, offered an explanation for its 24 decision that runs counter to the evidence 25 before the agency, or is so implausible that 26 it could not be ascribed to a difference in 27 view or the products of expertise.' 28 Cellular Phone Taskforce v. FCC, 205 F.3d 82 , 90 (2d Cir. 2000) 29 (quoting State Farm, 463 U.S. a…
discussed
Cited "see"
State Of Louisiana v. Treveon Robinson
(2×)
See State v. Haddad, 99- 1272 ( La. 2129/ 00), 767 So. 2d 682, 686 , cert. denied, 531 U. S. 1070 , 121 S. Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed. 2d 660 ( 2001); State v. Victores, 486 So. 2d 897 , 899- 900 ( La.
discussed
Cited "see"
State Of Louisiana v. Andre V. Griffin
(2×)
See State v. Haddad, 99- 1272 ( La. 2129100), 767 So. 2d 682, 686 , cert, denied, 531 U.S. 1070 , 121 S. Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 ( 2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
Straw v. United States
See Cellular Phone Taskforce v. F.C.C., 217 F.3d 72 , 73 (2d Cir. 2000) (per curiam) ("Title II of the ADA is not applicable to the federal government."), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1070 (2001); Pierce v. United States, 117 Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Franklin
(2×)
See State v. Haddad, 99-1272, p. 5 (La.2/29/00), 767 So.2d 682, 685-86 , cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1070 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 (2001). .
cited
Cited "see"
Garcia-Melendez v. Ashcroft
See Lopez-Elias v. Reno, 209 F.3d 788, 791 (5th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1069 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Cho
(2×)
See, State v. Haddad, 99-1272, p. 5 (La.2/29/00), 767 So.2d 682, 685 , cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1070 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
Tonia L. Cush-Crawford, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Adchem Corp., Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee
See Alexander v. Riga, 208 F.3d 419, 430-34 (3d Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1069 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
Balogun v. Ashcroft
See id. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II). 18 . 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(a)(2). 19 . 209 F.3d 788 (5th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1069 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 (2001). 20 .
cited
Cited "see"
Mohammad Musa Yousefi v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service
See Lopez-Elias v. Reno, 209 F.3d 788, 793 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 757 (2001); Abdel-Razek v. INS, 114 F.3d 831, 832 (9th Cir. 1997).
cited
Cited "see"
Yousefi v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service
See Lopez-Elias v. Reno, 209 F.3d 788, 793 (5th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1069 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 (2001); Abdel-Razek v. INS, 114 F.3d 831, 832 (9th Cir.1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
Associates Home Eq. Servs. v. Troup
See Alexander v. Riga, 208 F. 3d 419, 432-33 (3rd Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1069 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed. 2d 660 (2001); Walker v. Crigler, 976 F. 2d 900, 904-05 (4th Cir.1992); Marr v. Rife, 503 F. 2d 735, 741 (6th Cir.1974).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Walker v. Todd Village, LLC
See, e.g., Alexander v. Riga, 208 F.3d 419 (3rdCir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1069 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Elanith Valansi v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States
(2×)
See, e.g., Lopez-Elias v. Reno, 209 F.3d 788, 791 (5th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1069 , 121 S.Ct. 757 , 148 L.Ed.2d 660 (2001) ("Reviewing the matter de novo, we nevertheless conclude that we have no jurisdiction under IIRIRA [Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996], because Lopez-Elias was convicted of a crime of violence...."); Solorzano-Patlan v. INS, 207 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir.2000) ("[B]oth our jurisdiction to hear this case and the merits of the appeal turn on the question of whether Solorzano-Patlan is an aggravated felon, a decision we review de nov…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Valansi v. Atty Gen USA
See, e.g., Lopez-Elias v. Reno, 209 F.3d 788, 791 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 757 (2001) ("Reviewing the matter de novo, we nevertheless conclude that we have no jurisdiction under IIRIRA [Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996], because Lopez-Elias was convicted of a crime of violence . . . ."); Solorzano-Patlan v. INS, 207 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir. 2000) ("[B]oth our jurisdiction to hear this case and the merits of the appeal turn on the question of whether Solorzano-Patlan is an aggravated felon, a decision we review de novo."); Ye v. INS, 214 F.3d 1…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Louisiana
v.
Haddad
v.
Haddad
No. 00-198.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 8, 2001.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: D. New Mexico (1)
Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.