green
Positive treatment
3.5 score
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Ham v. Brice
See F.T.C. v. Assail, Inc., 410 F.3d 256 , 267 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 735 , 163 L.Ed.2d 569 (2005).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hovey v. Woodford
See id. (concluding that because petitioner suffered no adverse effect from counsel’s conflict of interest, no prejudice resulted from petitioner’s exclusion from a hearing in which the trial judge investigated the extent of the conflict of inter- est); see also United States v. Wheat, 813 F.2d 1399, 1404-05 (9th Cir. 1987) (as amended), aff’d, 486 U.S. 153 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lincoln General Ins. Co. v. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS.
See Mid Atlantic Medical Services, LLC v. Sereboff, 407 F.3d 212, 214-15 (4th Cir.), cert. granted, ___ U.S. ___, 126 S.Ct. 735 , 163 L.Ed.2d 567 (2005). [5] That statute provides, in pertinent part, that a civil action may be brought under § 502(a)(3) of ERISA: by a participant, beneficiary, or fiduciary (A) to enjoin any act or practice which violates any provision of this subchapter or the terms of the plan, or (B) to obtain other appropriate equitable relief (i) to redress such violations or (ii) to enforce any provisions of this subchapter or the terms of the plan. 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(…
discussed
Cited "see"
Lincoln General Insurance v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
See Mid Atlantic Medical Services, LLC v. Sereboff, 407 F.3d 212, 214-15 (4th Cir.), cert. granted, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 735 , 163 L.Ed.2d 567 (2005). 5 That statute provides, in pertinent part, that a civil action may be brought under § 502(a)(3) of ERISA: by a participant, beneficiary, or fiduciary (A) to enjoin any act or practice which violates any provision of this subchapter or the terms of the plan, or (B) to obtain other appropriate equitable relief (i) to redress such violations or (ii) to enforce any provisions of this subchapter or the terms of the plan. 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(3) (e…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
S.H. ex rel. Holt v. United States
See, e.g., Campbell v. Rice, 408 F.3d 1166, 1175 (9th Cir.) ("A prosecutor, like all attorneys, also owes a duty of candor toward a court”), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1036 , 126 S.Ct. 735 , 163 L.Ed.2d 578 (2005).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Diaz v. Castalan
See Rushen v. Spain, 464 U.S. 114 , 119 n. 2, 104 S.Ct. 453 , 78 L.Ed.2d 267 (1983) (“the right to be present during all critical stages of the proceedings [ ... ] as with most constitutional rights, [is] subject to harmless-error analysis [ ... ] unless the deprivation, by its very nature, cannot be harmless.”) (internal citations omitted); see also Campbell v. Rice, 408 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir.) (“The Supreme Court has never held that the exclusion of a defendant from a critical stage of his criminal proceedings constitutes a structural error”), ce rt. denied, 546 U.S. 1036 , 126 S.…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
ANTHONY A. CAMPBELL
v.
RICE, WARDEN
v.
RICE, WARDEN
05-5857.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 28, 2005.
126 S. Ct. 735
Published
The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.