green
Positive treatment
8.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1979 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1979
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 26 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
in Re: Thomas Lytle and Ellen Lytle
(2×)
See United presume lhat the SEC will pre-select docu- States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th ments for release to Justice in order to Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 prejudice the grand jury.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Audley E. McKelvey Jr.
See United States v. Greer, 588 F.2d 1151, 1155 (6th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 (1979); United States v. Peterson, 475 F.2d 806, 811 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 846 (1973).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Liberman
See id. (quoting United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979)).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Proceedings Relative to Norman Perl Occurring on or About 1980, (Gjp-86-2) Norman Perl, Richard Hunegs and the Law Firm of Deparq, Anderson, Perl, Hunegs and Rudquist, Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, Amicus Curiae. In Re: Grand Jury Proceedings Relative to Robert Appert and Gerald Pyle Occurring on or About 1980, (Gjp-86-3) Robert Appert and Gerald Pyle and the Law Firm of Appert & Pyle, Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, Amicus Curiae
See United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
In re Grand Jury Proceedings Relative to Perl
See United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ronald Willet Metzger
See United States v. Morningstar, 456 F.2d 278 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 896 , 93 S.Ct. 135 , 34 L.Ed.2d 153 (1972), cited in United States v. Greer, 588 F.2d 1151, 1156 (6th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James A. Notarantonio, United States of America v. Edward Notorantonio, United States of America v. Inge Company Incorporated
See United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285 (7th Cir.1978) (questions on sources of income on welfare-benefits application), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979); United States v. Carter, supra (questions on previous criminal convictions on application for SBA bonding program); Blake v. United States, 323 F.2d 245 (8th Cir.1963) (questions on previous criminal convictions on job application).
discussed
Cited "see"
Beynum v. United States
See McClendon v. United States, 587 F.2d 384, 387-88 (8th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1793 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979); United States v. Floyd, 555 F.2d 45, 46 , 48 n. 7 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 851 , 98 S.Ct. 163 , 54 L.Ed.2d 120 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Phanuel J. Hamilton
(2×)
See United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 297-98 (7th Cir. 1978), cert, denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979) (making fraudulent application for federal public aid benefits).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Maria Del Carmen Castillo Montemayor
See summary in United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 297 (5th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979): It is the general rule, however, that a statement may concern a matter within-the federal jurisdiction described in section 1001, even if the statement is not submitted directly to the federal department or agency involved, and the federal agency involvement is limited to reimbursement of expenditures.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Frank Petullo and Anthony Argentiere
See United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 297 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Sir Walter Raleigh Bouye, Jr.
Accord, McClendon v. United States, 587 F.2d 384, 389 (8th Cir. 1978), certiorari denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1793 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979) (no prejudice found for failure to comply with Rule 12.1(b), “assuming duty to comply”); United States v. Floyd, 555 F.2d 45 , 48 n.7 (2d Cir.), certiorari denied, 434 U.S. 851 , 98 S.Ct. 163 , 54 L.Ed.2d 120 (1977) (failure of government to comply with Rule 12.1(b) not prejudicial, “if indeed it was required.”).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Samuel Nmn Woodard, Jr., A/K/A Joe Siefus
See McClendon v. United States, 587 F.2d 384, 388-89 (8th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1793 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Joseph Ragusa and John Caresio
See United States v. Greer, 588 F.2d 1151, 1155 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979); United States v. Posnjak, 457 F.2d 1110, 1113 (2d Cir. 1972); United States v. Oba, 448 F.2d 892, 894 (9th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 935 , 92 S.Ct. 979 , 30 L.Ed.2d 811 (1972) (dissenting opinion).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re the Special February, 1975 Grand Jury. In Re the Special April, 1977 Grand Jury. Appeal of James E. Baggot
(2×)
Illinois v. Sarbaugh, 552 F.2d 768 , 772 n.2 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 889 , 98 S.Ct. 262 , 54 L.Ed.2d 174 (1977); see United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
cadc 1980
See United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Hohman
See United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 299 (7th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 (1979); United States v. Milanovich, 303 F.2d 626, 630 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 876 (1962); People v. District Court, 189 Colo. 159, 162-63 , 538 P.2d 887, 888-89 (1975) (en banc); State v. Harris, 477 S.W.2d 42, 45 (Mo. 1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries, Inc.
(2×)
See United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Everest Management Corp.
Illinois v. Sarbaugh, 552 F.2d 768 , 772 n.2 (7th Cir.), cert, denied, 434 U.S. 889 , 98 S.Ct. 262 , 54 L.Ed.2d 174 (1977); see United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir. 1978), cert, denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State Ex Rel. Nixon v. Askren
See, e.g., United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 299 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979); United States v. Daniels, 282 F.Supp. 360 (N.D.Ill. 1968).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Boyd v. United States
(2×)
The supervisory power does not provide courts with a "roving commission" to right wrongs, United States v. Jacobs, 547 F.2d 772, 777 (2d Cir.1976); see also United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 300 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979), or, in my judgment, to dispense with "principles of judicial administration long established and repeatedly followed." Local No. 8-6, supra, 361 U.S. at 367-68 , 80 S.Ct. at 394 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Facchini
See Rodgers, 466 U.S. at 480 , 104 S.Ct. at 1946 (“ ‘The [1934] amendment [to 18 U.S.C. § 1001 , formerly 18 U.S.C. § 80 ] indicated the congressional intent to protect the authorized functions of governmental departments and agencies from the perversion which might result from the deceptive practices described.’ ”) (quoting Gilliland, 312 U.S. at 93 , 61 S.Ct. at 522 ); see also United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 297 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Facchini
Sec. 80 ] indicated the congressional intent to protect the authorized functions of governmental departments and agencies from the perversion which might result from the deceptive practices described.' ") (quoting Gilliland, 312 U.S. at 93 , 61 S.Ct. at 522 ); see also United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 297 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Haynes
See, e.g., United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 295-96 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979); United States v. Bessesen, 433 F.2d 861, 864 (8th Cir.1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 1009 , 91 S.Ct. 1254 , 28 L.Ed.2d 545 (1971); see generally 2 F. Devitt & C.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lucas v. Turner
See also United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979); State of Illinois v. Sarbaugh, 552 F.2d 768 , 772 n. 2 (7th Cir.1977), cert. denied sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lucas v. Turner
See also United States v. Stanford, 589 F.2d 285, 291 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 983 , 99 S.Ct. 1794 , 60 L.Ed.2d 244 (1979); State of Illinois v. Sarbaugh, 552 F.2d 768 , 772 n. 2 (7th Cir.1977), cert. denied sub nom.
Woods
v.
Georgia
v.
Georgia
No. 78-5948.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 2, 1979.
Published
Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.