green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.2 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“Only where there is a manifest disregard of the agreement ... may a reviewing court disturb the award”
Treatment trajectory · 1977 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1977
2001
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 26 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
First Commercial Financial Group, Inc. v. Baghdoian
only where there is a manifest disregard of the agreement ... may a reviewing court disturb the award
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Thomas F. McCann
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See id. 9 Even were we to accept McCann's version of events that he was on a "suicide mission" when he robbed the bank, that version of events may explain McCann's motive for robbing the bank but it does not negate McCann's knowledge of his conduct.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Morrison
See United States v. Klare, 545 F.2d 93, 94 (9th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1699 , 52 L.Ed.2d 390 (1977); United States v. Porter, 431 F.2d 7 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 960 , 91 S.Ct. 360 , 27 L.Ed.2d 269 (1970).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Abcasis
See United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 272 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977) (citations omitted).
discussed
Cited "see"
Smith v. Lowe
See Smith v. Martin, 542 F.2d 688 (6th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 (1977). 6 Smith alleged nothing in his complaint that would make the County Jailer, city police officers, or Commonwealth Detective subject to liability under Section 1983. 7 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the district court's memorandum dated May 3, 1989, we hereby affirm the order of the district court pursuant to Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.
discussed
Cited "see"
Michael Terrell v. Daniel Borchert
See Smith v. Martin, 542 F.2d 688, 690-91 (6th Cir.1976) (per curiam), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 (1977); Denman v. Leedy, 479 F.2d 1097, 1098 (6th Cir.1973) (per curiam). 5 Lastly, we find no merit to plaintiff's argument on appeal that the district court failed to consider his request for injunctive and/or declaratory relief.
discussed
Cited "see"
Duane K. Brown v. George M. Glasser, Judge Carol A. Pietrykowski, Clerk of Courts, Defendants
See Smith v. Martin, 542 F.2d 688, 690-91 (6th Cir.1976) (per curiam), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 (1977); Denman v. Leedy, 479 F.2d 1097, 1098 (6th Cir.1973) (per curiam). 6 Accordingly, the motion for counsel is denied, and the district court's judgment is hereby affirmed pursuant to Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. * The Honorable Bernard A. Friedman, U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation
discussed
Cited "see"
Vernon E. Rodman v. Maxine Dalton Christopher E. Veidt
See Smith v. Martin, 542 F.2d 688, 690-91 (6th Cir.1976) (per curiam), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 (1977). 4 Moreover, plaintiff's conclusory allegations of judicial bias are insufficient to mandate recusal.
discussed
Cited "see"
Harper v. Kelly
See United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 274 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, Indiviglia v. United States, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977) (remarks by prosecutor that government accomplice witnesses would be subject to indictment for perjury and previously uncharged offenses in the event they testified falsely constituted permissible argument that the witnesses had no motive to testify falsely).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Castellano
See United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 272 (2d Cir.) (when witness began cooperating only one year before indictment, 2V2 year delay was acceptable), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977); United States v. Slochowsky, 575 F.Supp. at 1564, 1569 (six-month delay after major witness began cooperating and government’s attempt to obtain more witnesses justified almost five-year delay in bringing some parts of RICO indictment); United States v. Puma, 521 F.Supp. at 260 (five-year delay permissible in case involving informant); cf .
discussed
Cited "see"
Yolman v. State
See United States v. Joseph, 533 F.2d 282 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1698 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977) (limiting Williamson to cases where contingent fees are used to obtain evidence against particular persons).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. McCall
See United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977) and cases cited therein.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. McCall
See United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977) and cases cited therein.
discussed
Cited "see"
Sterngass v. Bowman
See Smith v. Martin, 542 F.2d 688, 690 (6th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 388 (1977); Erlich v. Glasner, 418 F.2d 226 (9th Cir.1969); Marty’s Adult World of New Britain, Inc. v. Guida, 453 F.Supp. 810, 813 (D.Conn.1978); Merco Properties, Inc. v. Guggenheimer, 395 F.Supp. 1322, 1325 (S.D.N.Y.1975).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Bobby Cochran, A/K/A \Sundance\"
See United States v. Joseph, 533 F.2d 282, 286-87 (5th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1698 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977) (applying harmless error rule to a Brady violation).
discussed
Cited "see"
State ex rel. Hill v. Travers
See Smith v. Martin, 542 F.2d 688, 690 (6th Cir. 1976), cert. denied 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 388 , and Means v. Wilson, 522 F.2d 833, 840-841 (8th Cir. 1975), cert. denied 424 U.S. 958 , 96 S.Ct. 1436 , 47 L.Ed.2d 364 , in which failure to allege the necessary animus was held to constitute grounds for dismissal of plaintiffs’ § 1985(3) claims.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Samuel Israelski
See United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 274 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. William Thomas
See United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 268 (2d Cir.), cert, denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977); United States v. Rodriguez, 509 F.2d 1342, 1347 (5th Cir. 1975); Koolish v. United States, 340 F.2d 513, 526 (8th Cir.), cert, denied, 381 U.S. 951 , 85 S.Ct. 1805 , 14 L.Ed.2d 724 (1965).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Aloi
See United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 273-74 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, Indiviglia v. United States, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977); United States v. Johnson, 478 F.2d 1129, 1131-32 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Kahn, 381 F.2d 824, 841 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 1015 , 88 S.Ct. 591 , 19 L.Ed.2d 661 (1967); United States v. Abrams, 29 F.R.D. 178, 181-82 (S.D.N.Y.1961), aff’d, 351 F.2d 942 (2d Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 919 , 86 S.Ct. 1364 , 16 L.Ed.2d 440 (1966).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Nwankwo
See, e.g., United States v. Ricco, 549 F.2d 264, 274 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Flender Corporation v. Techna-Quip Company and Robert J. McGuire
Co., 388 U.S. 395 , 87 S.Ct. 1801 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1270 (1967) (a claim of fraud in the inducement of the entire contract is arbitrable if the arbitration clause evidences that the parties so intend; a claim of fraud in the inducement of the arbitration clause is for the court to decide). 1 Stripped of its window-dressing, this argument is an attack on the arbitrator’s resolution of the merits — his finding that the contract continued in force notwithstanding the dissolution of Techna-Quip, Inc. We reiterate “this circuit’s caution against allowing a party to use issues of the arbitrator�…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Daniel Darby
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Klare, 545 F.2d 93, 94 (9th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1699 , 52 L.Ed.2d 390 (1977) (per curiam).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers v. Venezolana Internacional de Aviacion, S.A.
See, e.g., Amoco Oil Company v. Oil, Chem. & Atomic Wkrs., etc., 548 F.2d 1288 (7th Cir. 1977), cert. den., 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United Steelworkers of America v. Dayton-Walther Corp.
See also Amoco Oil Co. v. Oil, Chem. & Atomic Workers, 548 F.2d 1288, 1296 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150 v. J. Pease Construction Co.
See also Amoco Oil Co. v. Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union, Local 7-1, Inc., 548 F.2d 1288 (7th Cir.), cert. denied 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1697 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977); F. W.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Barry Rinn and Alex Selva
See also United States v. Joseph, 533 F.2d 282 , 286— 87 (5th Cir. 1976), cert, denied, 431 U.S. 905 , 97 S.Ct. 1698 , 52 L.Ed.2d 389 (1977); accord, United States v. McGovern, 499 F.2d 1140 (1st Cir. 1974). (3) We are satisfied for the reasons adopted by the District Court at pretrial conference that the ground of inadequate notice of the Government’s intention to use the recordings and transcripts has no merit.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Fimbres
v.
California
v.
California
No. 76-6075.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 2, 1977.
Published
Citer courts: N.D. Illinois (1)
Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.