Long Beach Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Fed. Home Loan Bank, 351 U.S. 916 (1956). · Go Syfert
Search
Long Beach Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Fed. Home Loan Bank, 351 U.S. 916 (1956). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
89 citation events across 20 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Robert Rose, Sr., United States of America v. James Hill (ca1, 1982-01-27) · Strongest negative: United States v. John Merrill Hall, United States of America v. William King Nichols, United States of America v. James Kline Dever (ca9, 1973-10-19)
Treatment trajectory · 1957 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1957 1991 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited "but see" United States v. John Merrill Hall, United States of America v. William King Nichols, United States of America v. James Kline Dever (8×)
9th Cir. · 1973 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see United States v. Sugden ( 226 F.2d 281 (9th 1955), affirmed per curiam, 76 S.Ct. 709 , 351 U.S. 916 [ 100 L.Ed. 1449 ] (1956)). 9 Id. at 2197 (emphasis added to text).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Robert Rose, Sr., United States of America v. James Hill (2×)
1st Cir. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Sugden, 226 F.2d 281, 286 (9th Cir. 1955) (dictum), aff’d, 351 U.S. 916 , 76 S.Ct. 709 , 100 L.Ed. 1449 (1956).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Sharon Margaret Pavlak, Cross-Appellee v. John R. Church, Individually and in His Capacity as Chief of Police for the City of Boise, Cross-Appellants (2×)
9th Cir. · 1984 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also United States v. Sugden, 226 F.2d 281, 284 (9th Cir.1955) (“The purpose of Section 605 is generally said to be to protect the ‘means’ of interstate communication” (footnote omitted)), aff’d, 351 U.S. 916 , 76 S.Ct. 709 , 100 L.Ed. 1449 (1956) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Shah (2×)
W.D. Pa. · 1974 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Sugden v. United States, 226 F.2d 281 (9th Cir. 1955) affirmed per curiam 351 U.S. 916 , 76 S.Ct. 709 , 100 L.Ed. 1449 ; and Arrington v. United States, 350 F.Supp. 710 (E.D.Pa.1972).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Long Beach Federal Savings & Loan Association
v.
Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco
No. 731.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 30, 1956.
351 U.S. 916
Charles K. Chapman for the Long Beach Federal Savings & Loan Assn, et al., and F. Henry NeCasek for the Home Investment Co., appellants. Solicitor General Sobeloff, Assistant Attorney General Burger, Samuel D. Slade and Donald B. Mac-Guineas for McAllister et al., and Sylvester Hoffmann for the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, appellees. Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General of California, and Everett W. Mattoon, Assistant Attorney General, filed a brief on behalf of the citizens of California, as amici curiae, in support of appellants.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

[*916] Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Per Curiam:

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.[*]

[As amended, post, p. 922.]