green
Positive treatment
5.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1972 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1972
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Yamashita-Shinnihon Kisen, K.K. Tokyo v. W. J. Jones & Son, Inc.
But see In Re Seaboard Shipping Corp., 449 F.2d 132 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied 406 U.S. 949 , 92 S.Ct. 2039 , 32 L.Ed.2d 337 (1972); Watz v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 431 F.2d 100 (5th Cir. 1970); Horton & Horton, Inc. v. T/S J.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Zolin
See United States v. Shewfelt, 455 F.2d 836 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2042 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Zolin
See United States v. Shewfelt, 455 F.2d 836 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2042 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
In the Matter of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Company, Debtor. Consolidated Appeals of Railway Labor Executives' Association, Intervenor. State of Wisconsin Department of Transportation, State of South Dakota, Port of Pend Oreille, Pend Oreille Valley Railroad Company, Inc., and Seattle and North Coast Railroad Company, Intervening
See In re Penn Central Transportation Co., 452 F.2d 1107 (3d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2040 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
In re Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad
See In re Penn Central Transportation Co., 452 F.2d 1107 (3d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2040 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
Sullivan v. Chase Investment Services of Boston, Inc.
Accord, United States v. Shewfelt, 455 F.2d 836, 840 (9 Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2042 , 32 L.Ed.2d 231 (1972) (cases collected).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Russell v. Losing, Jr., United States of America v. Donald Ray Feick
See United States v. Warren, 453 F.2d 738, 742-43 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2040 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972); Cohen v. United States, 378 F.2d 751, 760 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 897 , 88 S.Ct. 217 , 19 L.Ed.2d 215 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Michael Santo Polizzi, United States of America v. Jack S. Shapiro, United States of America v. Peter James Bellanca, United States of America v. Anthony Giardano, United States of America v. Arthur J. Rooks, United States of America v. Anthony Joseph Zerilli, United States of America v. Emprise Corporation, a New York Corporation
See United States v. Shewfelt, 455 F.2d 836, 838-839 (9 Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2042 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972); Bisno v. United States, 299 F.2d 711, 719-720 (9 Cir. 1961), cert. denied, 370 U.S. 952 , 82 S.Ct. 1602 , 8 L.Ed.2d 818 (1962).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Polizzi
See United States v. Shewfelt, 455 F.2d 836, 838-839 (9 Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2042 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972); Bisno v. United States, 299 F.2d 711, 719-720 (9 Cir. 1961), cert. denied, 370 U.S. 952 , 82 S.Ct. 1602 , 8 L.Ed.2d 818 (1962).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Heng Awkak Roman, A/K/A Roman and Lee Koo, A/K/A Lee, A/K/A Lanky Lee
(2×)
See United States v. Warren, 453 F.2d 738, 743-744 (2d Cir.), cert, denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2040 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972), where Judge Smith suggested it would be wise for trial judges “to state on the record the reasons” for dispensing with a pre-sentence report.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Phillip Manuella
See 2 C. *442 Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure § 522 at 389-90 (1969). 3 Our own United States v. Warren, 453 F.2d 738, 743-744 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2040 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972), however, makes it very plain that dispensing with a presentence report should be done very rarely and then only if accompanied with a statement of the reasons therefor.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Elmer Thomas Mitchell
(2×)
See United States v. AlmeidaSanchez, 452 F.2d 459, 460, 461 (CA9 1971), cert. granted 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2050 , 32 L.Ed.2d 331 (1972).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Tug Ocean Queen, Inc. v. Tanker Four Lakes
See also In re Seaboard Shipping Corp., 449 F.2d 132 , 136 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 949 , 92 S.Ct. 2039 , 32 L.Ed.2d 337 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Corps of Engineers of the United States Army
See also Upper Pecos Ass’n v. Stans, 452 F.2d 1233, 1236 (10th Cir. 1971), cert. granted, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2040 , 32 L.Ed.2d 330 (1972), vacated and remanded to determine mootness, 409 U.S. 1021 , 93 S.Ct. 458 , 34 L.Ed.2d 313 (1972). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sierra Club v. Froehlke
See, e. g., Upper Pecos Association v. Stans, 452 F.2d 1233, 1236 (10th Cir. 1971), vacated, 406 U.S. 944 , 92 S.Ct. 2040 , 32 L.Ed.2d 330 (remanded to determine mootness); Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Corps of Engineers of U.S. Array, 348 F.Supp. 916, 925 (N.D.Miss. 1972); Indian Lookout Alliance v. Volpe, 345 F.Supp. 1167, 1172 (S.D.Iowa 1972); Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Corps of Engineers of U.S. Army, 342 F.Supp. 1211, 1216-1217 (E.D.Ark. 1972), supporting earlier ruling, 325 F.Supp. 749, 755 (1971); Morningside-Lenox Park Association v. Volpe, 334 F.Supp. 132, 139 (N.D.Ga.…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Otter Tail Power Co.
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 71-991.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 22, 1972.
Blackmun, Consideration, Matter, Took.
Published
Appeal from D. C. Minn. Probable jurisdiction noted.
Mr. Justice Blackmun and Mr. Justice Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of this matter.