U-Haul Int'l, Inc. v. Romano, 534 U.S. 815 (2001). · Go Syfert
U-Haul Int'l, Inc. v. Romano, 534 U.S. 815 (2001). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“it is generally recognized that a court has the power sua sponte to grant summary judgment to a non-movant when there has been a motion but no cross- motion.”
34 citation events (34 in the last 25 years) across 16 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Johnsonville Sausage LLC v. Klement Sausage Co Inc (wied, 2020-03-27)
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Johnsonville Sausage LLC v. Klement Sausage Co Inc
E.D. Wis. · 2020 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
it is generally recognized that a court has the power sua sponte to grant summary judgment to a non-movant when there has been a motion but no cross- motion.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Davis v. Milwaukee County
E.D. Wis. · 2002 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
it is generally recognized that a court has the power sua sponte to grant summary judgment to a non-movant when there has been a motion but no cross-motion.
cited Cited "see" Sackett v. ITC^ DELTACOM, INC.
E.D. Tenn. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Romano v. U-Haul Int’l, 233 F.3d 655, 670 (1st Cir.2000), ce rt. denied, 534 U.S. 815 , 122 S.Ct. 41 , 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001); Zimmermann v. Assocs.
discussed Cited "see" Wei Zhang v. American Gem Seafoods, Inc., Delaware Corporation McMi Food Company, a Texas Corporation Harry Lees, a Natural Person
9th Cir. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Romano v. U-Haul Int’l, Inc., 233 F.3d 655, 673 (1st Cir.2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 815 , 122 S.Ct. 41 , 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001) (finding that a plaintiffs termination on the basis of her sex was “more reprehensible than would appear in a case involving economic harms only”).
cited Cited "see" Cousin v. Sofono, Inc.
D. Mass. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Romano v. U-Haul Int'l, 233 F.3d 655 (1st Cir.2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 815 , 122 S.Ct. 41 , 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001).
discussed Cited "see" Crowley v. L.L. Bean, Inc.
1st Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Romano v. U-Haul Int’l, 233 F.3d 655, 665 (1st Cir.2000), cert. denied, — U.S.—, 122 S.Ct. 41 , 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001). “[T]he giving of [a jury] instruction is reversible error only if it (1) was misleading, unduly complicating, or incorrect as a matter of law, and (2) adversely affected the objecting party’s substantial rights.” Rodowicz, 279 F.3d at 42 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Brown v. Smith
Md. Ct. Spec. App. · 2007 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Romano v. U-Haul Int’l, 233 F.3d 655, 671 (1st Cir.2000), (applying same principle, in interpreting jury award of $15,000 in so-called nominal damages for civil rights violation as a compensatory damage award), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 815 , 122 S.Ct. 41 , 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001); Creem v. Cicero, 12 ConmApp. 607, 533 A.2d 234, 236 (1987) (“ ‘Generally, nominal damages are fixed without regard to the extent of harm done and are assessed in some trifling or trivial amount’ ”) (citation omitted); The Toledo Group, Inc. v. Benton Indus., Inc., 87 Ohio App.3d 798 , 623 N.E.2d 205, 2…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Juniper v. Com.
Va. · 2006 · signal: see also · confidence low
FACTS AND MATERIAL PROCEEDINGS BELOW Under well-settled principles of appellate review, we consider the evidence presented at trial in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the prevailing party in the trial court. 2 Burns v. Commonwealth, 261 Va. 307 , 313, 541 S.E.2d 872 , 877, cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1043 , 122 S.Ct. 621 , 151 L.Ed.2d 542 (2001); see also Lovitt v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 497 , 502, 537 S.E.2d 866 , 870 (2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 815 , 122 S.Ct. 41 , 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Gibson v. Mayor And Council Of The City Of Wilmington
3rd Cir. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Kassbaum v. Steppenwolf Prods., Inc., 236 F.3d 487, 494 (9th Cir.2000) (quoting Cool Fuel Inc. v. Connett, 685 F.2d 309, 311 (9th Cir.1982)) ("When one party moves for summary judgment and at a hearing the record reveals no genuine dispute on a material fact, `the overwhelming weight of authority supports the conclusion that ... the court may sua sponte grant summary judgment to the non-moving party.'"), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 815 , 122 S.Ct. 41 (2001); Ramsey v. Coughlin, 94 F.3d 71, 73 (2d Cir.1996) (stating that it is generally established that "`the trial court is not precluded …
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Gibson v. Mayor of Wilmington
3rd Cir. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Kassbaum v. Steppenwolf Prods., Inc., 236 F.3d 487, 494 (9th Cir.2000) (quoting Cool Fuel Inc. v. Connett, 685 F.2d 309, 311 (9th Cir.1982)) ("When one party moves for summary judgment and at a hearing the record reveals no genuine dispute on a material fact, the overwhelming weight of authority supports the conclusion that ... the court may sua sponte grant summary judgment to the non-moving party.' ”), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 815 , 122 S.Ct. 41 (2001); Ramsey v. Coughlin, 94 F.3d 71, 73 (2d Cir.1996) (stating that it is generally established that " 'the trial court is not preclud…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Medcalf v. Trustees of University of Pennsylvania
3rd Cir. · 2003 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Romano v. U-Haul Int’l, 233 F.3d 655, 670 (1st Cir. 2000) cert. denied, 534 U.S. 815 , 122 S.Ct. 41 , 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001); Zimmermann v. Associates First Capital Corp., 251 F.3d 376 , 385 (2d Cir.2001); Passantino v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Prods., Inc., 212 F.3d 493 , 516 (9th Cir.2000); Deffenbaugh-Williams v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 188 F.3d 278, 286 (5th Cir. 1999).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Sierra Club v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service
D. Or. · 2002 · signal: see also · confidence low
“An agency’s decision not to prepare an EIS once that agency has prepared an EA is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and will be set aside only if it is ‘arbitrary and capricious.’ ” Id. at 1070 ; see also Ka Mákani, 295 F.3d at 959 (because NEPA does not contain a separate provision for judicial review, courts review an agency’s compliance with NEPA under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)). *1129 “The arbitrary and capricious standard requires a court to ensure that an agency has taken the requisite ‘hard look’ at the environmental consequences of its proposed action,…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Golson v. Green Tree Financial Servicing Corp.
4th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See e.g., Romano v. U-Haul, Int’l, 233 F.3d 655, 670 (1st Cir.2000), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 122 S.Ct. 41 , 151 L.Ed.2d 14 (2001); Passantino v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Prods., Inc., 212 F.3d 493 , 516 (9th Cir. 2000); Deffenbaugh-Williams v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 188 F.3d 278, 286 (5th Cir.1999).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
U-Haul International, Inc.
v.
Romano
No. 00-1700.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 1, 2001.
534 U.S. 815

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.