green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
7.7 score
“where the defendant received more than the seller's actual loss ... damages are the amount of the defendant's profit”
Treatment trajectory · 1973 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1973
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 23 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Volk v. Davidson & Co.
where the defendant received more than the seller's actual loss ... damages are the amount of the defendant's profit
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Volk v. D.A. Davidson & Co.
where the defendant received more than the seller's actual loss ... damages are the amount of the defendant's profit
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Angelastro v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.
positive proof of reliance" not required "under the circumstances of this case
cited
Cited "see"
Dept. of Human Services v. F. T. R.
See Kastigar v. United States, 406 US 441, 444 , 92 S Ct 1653 , 32 L Ed 2d 212 , reh’g den, 408 US 931 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Delacruz
See Kastigar v. United States , 406 U.S. 441 , 453-54, 92 S.Ct. 1653 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 , reh. denied 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 (1972) (mere use immunity insufficient protection under Fifth Amendment; use and derivative use immunity coextensive with constitutional privilege against self-incrimination).
discussed
Cited "see"
Attorney General Opinion No.
See K.S.A. 38-1624 . 42 451 U.S. 454 , 101 S.Ct. 1866 , 68 L.Ed.2d 359 (1981). 43 Id . at 467. 44 156 F.3d 340 (2nd Cir. 1998). 45 Supra , note 35. 46 Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 , 92 S.Ct. 1653 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 , reh. denied , 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 (1972). 47 Id . at 461. 48 382 U.S. 70 , 86 S.Ct. 194 , 19 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). 49 Id . at 78. 50 Supra , note 46. 51 Even if a prosecutor would consider POSIT responses in making a charging decision, there would have to be sufficient evidence, independent of the POSIT responses, to establish a basis for charging.…
discussed
Cited "see"
Nutramax Laboratories, Inc. v. Twin Laboratories, Inc.
See Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 444-45 , 92 S.Ct. 1653 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 (“[The Fifth Amendment privilege] can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal ... and it protects against any disclosures which the witness reasonably believes could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead to other evidence that might be so used.”), reh’g denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Richardson
See United States v. Williams, 27 M.J. at 717 (citing Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 445 , 92 S.Ct. 1653, 1656 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 rehearing denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 (1972)).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Williams
See Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 443-44 , 92 S.Ct. 1653, 1655-56 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 , rehearing denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Proceeding 82-2, Nigro
See Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 , 92 S.Ct. 1653 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 , reh. denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Vinegra
See, Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 , 92 S.Ct. 1653 , 32 L.Ed. 2d 212 (1972), reh. den. 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed. 2d 345 (1972); United States v. Mandujuano, 425 U.S. 564 , 96 S.Ct. 1768 , 48 L.Ed. 2d 212 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Rev. Alberto Mejias, A/K/A Rev. Angel Ortiz
See United States v. Ferrara, 458 F.2d 868, 875 (2d Cir.), cert. den., 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2498 , 33 L.Ed.2d 343 (1972); United States v. DeMasi, 445 F.2d 251, 255 (2d Cir.), cert. den., 404 U.S. 882 , 92 S.Ct. 211 , 30 L.Ed.2d 164 (1971); United States v. Parrott, 425 F.2d 972, 975 (2d Cir.), cert. den., 400 U.S. 824 , 91 S.Ct. 47 , 27 L.Ed.2d 53 (1970).
discussed
Cited "see"
Citizens Committee to Oppose Annexation v. City of Lynchburg
They can determine whether the challenged action is subject to § 5 and enjoin enforcement pending compliance by the state or its subdivision, but they lack jurisdiction to authorize implementation of the proposed change where it is found to be subject to § 5. 5 Allen v. State Bd. of Elections, 393 U.S. 544 , 89 S.Ct. 817 , 22 L.Ed.2d 1 (1969); Beer v. United States, 374 F.Supp. 357 (D.D.C.1974); see Holt v. City of Richmond, 459 F.2d 1093 (4th Cir.), cert. denied 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2510 , 33 L.Ed.2d 343 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
George Vollin, Jr., and Harrison Douglas v. Ralph Kimbel
See Holt v. Richmond, 459 F.2d 1093 (4 Cir.), cert. denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2510 , 33 L.Ed.2d 343 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
City of Richmond v. United States
(2×)
See Holt v. City of Richmond, 459 F. 2d 1093, 1108 (CA4) (Winter, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 408 U. S. 931 (1972); Holt v. City of Richmond, 334 F. Supp. 228, 236 (ED Va. 1971), rev'd on other grounds, 459 F. 2d 1093 , supra. [12] Had this agreement been properly submitted for § 5 clearance in 1969, I cannot believe that the annexation would ever have been permitted to take place.
discussed
Cited "see"
City of Richmond, Virginia v. United States
See text at note 22 supra and note 43 infra. [42] See Holt v. City of Richmond, supra note 25, 334 F.Supp. at 231 . [43] We are not, contrary to the City's arguments, precluded from finding that Richmond failed to prove the absence of a discriminatory purpose in negotiating the 1969 annexation by the decision of the 4th Circuit in Holt v. City of Richmond, 459 F.2d 1093 , cert. denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2510 , 33 L.Ed.2d 343 (1972), reversing E.D.Va., 334 F.Supp. 228 (1971).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Altro
See United States v. Ferrara, 458 F.2d 868 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2498 , 33 L.Ed.2d 343 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Sotteriou
See Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 , 92 S.Ct. 1653 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 (1972), reh. den. 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 (1972); In re Zicarelli, 55 N.J. 249 (1970), aff'd 406 U.S. 472 (1972); "The Fifth Amendment's Proxy-Transactional or Use Immunity?," 3 Seton Hall L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ziemack v. Centel Corp.
See also Affiliated Ute Citizens v. United States, 406 U.S. 128, 152-54 , 92 S.Ct. 1456, 1471-72 , 31 L.Ed.2d 741 (1972), reh’g. denied, 407 U.S. 916 , 92 S.Ct. 2430 , 32 L.Ed.2d 692 (1972), and reh’g. denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Weinberg
See Lovasco, supra, 431 U.S. at 789 , 97 S.Ct. at 2048 ; Marion, supra, 404 U.S. at 326 , 92 S.Ct. at 466 ; see also United States v. Ferrara, 458 F.2d 868, 875 (2d Cir.) (mere dimming of memory is insufficient showing of prejudice), cert. denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2498 , 33 L.Ed.2d 343 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Henry O. Boyd, Sr. v. Robert J. Henderson, Superintendent, Auburn Correctional Facility
See also Kastigar v. United States (1972) 406 U.S. 441, 454-55 , 92 S.Ct. 1653 , 32 L.Ed.2d 212 , reh. denied 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2478 , 33 L.Ed.2d 345 ; Powell v. McCormack (1969) 395 U.S. 486 , 519 n.40, 89 S.Ct. 1944 , 23 L.Ed.2d 491 ; Cohens v. Virginia (1821) 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264 , 398, 5 L.Ed. 257 (Marshall, C.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Finkelstein
See also, United States v. Ferrara, 458 F.2d 868 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2498 , 33 L.Ed.2d 343 (1972) (cited in Brown, supra); and United States v. Iannelli, 461 F.2d 483 , at 485 n. 2 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 980 , 93 S.Ct. 310 , 34 L.Ed.2d 243 (1972) where neither factor was established. .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Peter Thomas Messina
See, e. g., United States v. Ferrara, 458 F.2d 868, 871 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 408 U.S. 931 , 92 S.Ct. 2498 , 33 L.Ed.2d 343 (1972); United States v. Phillips, 426 F.2d 1069, 1071 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 843 , 91 S.Ct. 86 , 27 L.Ed.2d 78 (1970); United States v. Corallo, 413 F.2d 1306, 1323 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 958 , 90 S.Ct. 431 , 24 L.Ed.2d 422 (1969).
Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 70-78.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 26, 1972.
Published
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (2) · D. New Jersey (1)
406 U. S. 128. Petition for rehearing denied. Mr. Justice Powell and Mr. Justice Rehnquist took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.