green
Positive treatment
3.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1973 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1973
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
New York v. Seneci
See State of California v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 474 F.2d 774, 776-777 (9th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2291 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973); Philadelphia Housing Authority v. American Radiator and Standard Sanitary Corporation, 309 F.Supp. 1057, 1061 (E.D.Pa.1969); and In re Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Equipment, 52 F.R.D. 398, 401 (C.D.Cal.1970).
discussed
Cited "see"
People of State of New York v. Seneci
See State of California v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 474 F.2d 774, 776-777 (9th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2291 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973); Philadelphia Housing Authority v. American Radiator and Standard Sanitary Corporation, 309 F.Supp. 1057, 1061 (E.D.Pa.1969); and In re Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Equipment, 52 F.R.D. 398, 401 (C.D.Cal.1970). 15 To be sure, in this case the Attorney General alleges that the defendants' conduct has caused substantial injury to the integrity of the state's marketplace and the economic well-being of all its citizens.
discussed
Cited "see"
House v. Balkcom
United States v. Allen, 445 F.2d 849 (5th Cir.1971) (per curiam); accord United States v. Olson, 473 F.2d 686 (8th *1151 Cir.), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 905 , 93 S.Ct. 2291 , 36 L.Ed.2d 970 (1973); see also United States v. Guzman, 468 F.2d 1245 (2d Cir. 1972) (Court stated that “[although we do not pass on the question of whether 18 to 20 year olds or 24 to 30 year olds or ‘youth’ in general constitute ‘cognizable groups’ for the purposes of challenges to jury selection plans, we do note that age is the only factor which defines such categories and despite talk of ‘generation gaps,�…
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Mid-Atlantic Toyota Distributors, Inc.
See California v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 474 F.2d 774 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2291 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Farrell
See Goguen v. Smith, 471 F.2d 88, 98-100 (1st Cir. 1972), 412 U.S. 905 , 93 S.Ct. 2291 , 36 L.Ed.2d 969 ; Thoms v. Smith, 334 F.Supp. 1203, 1208 (D.Conn.1971), aff’d sub. nom.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Farrell
See Goguen v. Smith, 471 F.2d 88, 98-100 (1st Cir. 1972), 412 U.S. 905 , 93 S.Ct. 2291 , 36 L.Ed.2d 969 ; Thoms v. Smith, 334 F.Supp. 1203, 1208 (D.Conn.1971), aff'd sub. nom.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Reiter v. Sonotone Corp.
See also State of California v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 474 F.2d 774 (9th Cir. 1973), cert. den. 412 U.S. 908 , 93 S.Ct. 2291 , 36 L.Ed.2d 974 (1973), in which the state’s standing to sue as parens patriae on behalf of its consumer citizens was rejected.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Allen M. Anderson v. J. Leland Casscles, Superintendent of Great Meadow Correctional Facility
See, e. g., United States v. Olson, 473 F.2d 686 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 905 , 93 S.Ct. 2291 , 36 L.Ed.2d 970 (1973); Chase v. United States, 468 F.2d 141 (7th Cir. 1972); United States v. Kuhn, 441 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1971).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Smith, Sheriff
v.
Goguen
v.
Goguen
No. 72-1254.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 21, 1973.
Published
Appeal from C. A. 1st Cir. Probable jurisdiction noted.