green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
3.3 score
“one who seeks to overcome the principle of stare decisis should be prepared to offer compelling reasons which outweigh the public interest in the stability of legal doctrine.”
Treatment trajectory · 1971 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1971
1998
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Eulitt v. Maine Department of Education
one who seeks to overcome the principle of stare decisis should be prepared to offer compelling reasons which outweigh the public interest in the stability of legal doctrine.
cited
Cited "see"
McAller v. Smith
See Ramos v. Beauregard, Inc., 423 F.2d 916, 917-18 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 865 , 91 S.Ct. 101 , 27 L.Ed.2d 104 (1970); see generally Thomas J.
cited
Cited "see"
Anibal Ruiz Rodriguez v. Litton Industries Leasing Corp.
See Ramos v. Beauregard, Inc., 423 F.2d 916 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 865 , 91 S.Ct. 101 , 27 L.Ed.2d 104 (1970).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Reeser v. Crowley Towing & Transportation Co.
See also Ramos v. Beauregard, Inc., 423 F.2d 916 (1st Cir.1970), cert. denied 400 U.S. 865 , 91 S.Ct. 101 , 27 L.Ed.2d 104 (1970) (movant must present compelling reasons which outweigh the public interest in the stability of a legal doctrine to be able to overcome the principle of “stare decisis”); United States v. Maine, 420 U.S. 515 , 95 S.Ct. 1155 , 43 L.Ed.2d 363 (1975) (“the doctrine of stare decisis is still a powerful force in our jurisprudence ...”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Messerschmidt v. United States
Compare Decca Ltd. v. United States, 190 Ct.Cl. 454, 460-62 , 420 F.2d 1010, 1014-15 (construing the means-plus-function claims in light of the specification), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 865 , 91 S.Ct. 102 , 27 L.Ed.2d 104 (1970) with E.I.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Luis Reveron Martinez
(2×)
See also Ramos v. Beauregard, Inc., 423 F.2d 916, 917 (1st Cir.) (departure necessitates "compelling reasons [adequate to] outweigh the public interest in the stability of legal doctrine"), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 865 , 91 S.Ct. 101 , 27 L.Ed.2d 104 (1970).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Stevenson v. State
See also Imbler v. Craven, 298 F.Supp. 795 (C.D.Cal.1969), aff’d, 424 F.2d 631 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 865 , 91 S.Ct. 100 , 27 L.Ed.2d 104 (1970); and United States ex rel.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Spain v. Rushen
See Sumner v. Mata, supra, 102 S.Ct. at 1306-07; see also Imbler v. State of California, 424 F.2d 631, 632 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 865 , 91 S.Ct. 100 , 27 L.Ed.2d 104 (1970).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Schlanger
v.
Seamans, Secretary of the Air Force
v.
Seamans, Secretary of the Air Force
No. 5481.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 19, 1970.
C. A. 9th Cir. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted.