green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.3 score
“he issue of what constitutes an 'openly fascist' journal is as much a matter of opinion or idea as is the question what constitutes 'fascism' or the 'radical right”
Treatment trajectory · 1977 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1977
2001
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Thomas McCabe v. Daniel Rattiner
he issue of what constitutes an 'openly fascist' journal is as much a matter of opinion or idea as is the question what constitutes 'fascism' or the 'radical right
cited
Cited "see"
Wachtel v. Storm
See Buckley v. Littell, 539 F.2d 882, 893 (2d Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed.2d 777 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
First National Bank Of Omaha v. The Marquette National Bank Of Minneapolis
See Missouri v. National Organization for Women, Inc., 620 F.2d 1301 (8th Cir. 1980) 5 The Minnesota act was passed in April 1976, yet it was not until the second Fisher case in 1977, Fisher v. First National Bank of Chicago, 538 F.2d 1284 (7th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed.2d 778 (1977) (Fisher I ); Fisher v. First National Bank of Omaha, 548 F.2d 255 (8th Cir. 1977) (Fisher II ), that the courts fully appreciated the protections of 12 U.S.C. § 85 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jewell v. NYP Holdings, Inc.
See, e.g., Buckley v. Littell, 539 F.2d 882, 893-94 (2d Cir.1976) (language such as “fascist,” “fellow traveller of fascism” and “radical right” held to be “tremendous[ly] imprecise! ]” and “so debatable, loose and varying, that they are insusceptible to proof of truth or falsity”), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed.2d 777 (1977); Corporate Training Unlimited, Inc. v. National Broadcasting Go., 981 F.Supp. 112, 123 (E.D.N.Y.1997) (holding that the title to a television broadcast, “Rambo Goes to Reykjavik”, was “the type of hyperbolic speech which ca…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sherman v. Citibank (South Dakota)
See, e.g., Fisher v. First Nat'l Bank, 538 F. 2d 1284, 1289-90 (7th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed. 2d 778 (1977). *441 In 1936, the Comptroller of the Currency issued an interpretation of section 85 which administratively recognized the "most favored lender" doctrine as part of federal banking law.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Hunter v. Greenwood Trust Co.
See, e.g., Fisher v. First Nat'l Bank, 538 F. 2d 1284, 1289-90 (7th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed. 2d 778 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Leal v. State
See also Ochs v. State, 543 S.W.2d 355 (Tex.Crim.App.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed.2d 778 (1977); Beasley v. State, 683 S.W.2d 132 (Tex.App.Eastland 1984, pet. ref'd); Hurwitz v. State, 673 S.W.2d 347 (Tex.App.Austin 1984), aff'd on other grounds, 700 S.W.2d 919 (Tex.Crim.App. 1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Leal v. State
See also Ochs v. State, 543 S.W.2d 355 (Tex.Crim.App.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed.2d 778 (1977); Beasley v. State, 683 S.W.2d 132 (Tex.App. — Eastland 1984, pet. ref’d); Hurwitz v. State, 673 S.W.2d 347 (Tex.App — Austin 1984), aff'd on other grounds, 700 S.W.2d 919 (Tex.Crim.App. 1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
William Janklow v. Newsweek, Inc.
(2×)
See, e.g., Buckley v. Littell, 539 F.2d 882 (2d Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed.2d 777 (1977) (calling someone a "fascist" was indefinite and therefore opinion, while comparing him to a known libeller was specific and so fact).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,010 Fred H. Harmsen v. C. Arnholt Smith
See also LeLandais & Company v. MDS Atron, 543 F.2d 421 , 424 & n. 5 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed.2d 777 (1976) (failure to adequately show damages prevents recovery).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Morosani v. First Nat. Bank of Atlanta
Compare First National Bank in Mena v. Nowlin, 509 F.2d 872, 876 (8th Cir. 1975) (phrase encompasses the entire case law of the state interpreting the state’s limitations on usury rather than merely incorporating the numerical usury rate adopted by the state) with Acker v. Provident National Bank, 373 F.Supp. 56, 63 (E.D.Pa.1974), aff’d in part, rev’d in part on other grounds, 512 F.2d 729 (3rd Cir. 1975) (question whether rate of interest charged by national bank is usurious is decided according to the law of the state “involved”), and Haas v. Pittsburgh National Bank, 60 F.R.D. 604…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Meehan v. Snow
See, e. g., Buckley v. Littell, 394 F.Supp. 918 (S.D.N.Y.1975), aff’d in part, rev’d in part, 539 F.2d 882 (2d Cir. 1976), cert. den., 429 U.S. 1062 , 97 S.Ct. 786 , 50 L.Ed.2d 777 (1977); Lady Windsor Hairdressers, Inc. v. Calvo, 35 Misc.2d 739 , 231 N.Y.S.2d 221 (Sup.Ct., Queens Co. 1962).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Fisher
v.
First National Bank of Chicago
v.
First National Bank of Chicago
No. 76-716.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 17, 1977.
Published
Citer courts: First Circuit (1)
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.