green
Positive treatment
4.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 2005 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2005
2015
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Perugini v. Giuliano
See Menon v. Dux, 81 Conn. App. 167, 170-71 , 838 A.2d 1038 (claim unpreserved where appealing party expressly acquiesced to court’s eviden-tiary ruling at trial), cert. denied, 269 Conn. 913 , 852 A.2d 743 , cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1003 , 125 S. Ct. 623 , 160 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Mortensen Construction & Utility, Inc. v. Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co.
See Delgado v. Reef Resort Ltd., 364 F.3d 642 (5th Cir.2004) (observing that “[tjhis court has on numerous occasions interpreted (Mississippi’s long-arm) statute to mean that non-residents may not sue non-resident corporations doing business in Mississippi” and that “[n]o intervening change in state statute or case law has occurred that would allow us to abandon the existing circuit precedent”), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1003 , 125 S.Ct. 623 , 160 L.Ed.2d 463 (2004); Submersible Sys., Inc. v. Perforadora Central, S.A., 249 F.3d 413, 418 (5th Cir.2001) (observing that “a nonresident pl…
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Lewis
See United States v. Robinson, 367 F.3d 278, 285-86 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1005 , 125 S.Ct. 623 , 160 L.Ed.2d 466 (2004); cf. Wicker v. McCotter, 798 F.2d 155, 157-58 (5th Cir.1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Billie Jerome Allen
See United States v. Robinson, 367 F.3d 278, 284 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 125 S.Ct. 623 , 160 L.Ed.2d 466 (2004); United States v. Higgs, 353 F.3d 281, 299 (4th Cir.2003), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 125 S.Ct. 627 , 160 L.Ed.2d 456 (2004); United States v. Quinones, 313 F.3d 49 , 53 n. 1 (2d Cir.2002), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1051 , 124 S.Ct. 807 , 157 L.Ed.2d 702 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Billie Jerome Allen
See United States v. Robinson, 367 F.3d 278, 284 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 125 S. Ct. 623 (2004); United States v. Higgs, 353 F.3d 281, 299 (4th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 125 S. Ct. 627 (2004); United States v. Quinones, 313 F.3d 49 , 53 n.1 (2d Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1051 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lewis v. Drew
It is well established under Connecticut law that “[a] party may preserve for appeal a claim that a jury instruction was improper either by submitting a written request to charge or by taking an exception to the charge as given.” Pestey v. Cushman, 259 Conn. 345, 372-73 , 788 A.2d 496 (2002); see also Menon v. Dux, 81 Conn. App. 167, 171-72 , 838 A.2d *312 1038, cert. denied, 269 Conn. 913 , 852 A.2d 743 , cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1003 , 125 S. Ct. 623 , 160 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Solomon
See Allen, 406 F.3d at 943 (“We therefore conclude that the Fifth Amendment requires at least one statutory aggravating factor and the mens rea requirement to be found by the grand jury and charged in the indictment”); see also Robinson, 367 F.3d at 278 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1005 , 125 S.Ct. 623 , 160 L.Ed.2d 466 (2004); United States v. Higgs, 353 F.3d 281, 298 (4th Cir.2003); United States v. Quinones, 313 F.3d 49 , 53 n. 1 (2d Cir.2002), ce rt. denied, 540 U.S. 1051 , 124 S.Ct. 807 , 157 L.Ed.2d 702 (2003) 3 The Court agrees with the reasoning of these courts and finds that…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Menon
v.
Dux
v.
Dux
04-441.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 29, 2004.
Published
MENON
v.
DUX.
No. 04-441.
Supreme Court of United States.
November 29, 2004.
1
App. Ct. Conn. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 81 Conn. App. 167, 838 A. 2d 1038.